This article originally ran on the wonderful The Good Men Project | Photo by Louise Enhorning
Hitting on people can be hard, so I can empathize with guys who feel they need to use pickup tactics to meet women—sort of. Maybe you’ve heard of “negs?” I once had a guy come up to me and say: “Oh those shoes look comfortable”… I turned around and hobbled away. Aside from being just groan-worthy, seduction-community tactics are ethically problematic and often, plainly, sexist. But the PUA approach is tempting for guys who have social anxiety—and awkwardness—around women. And I understand fear of rejection can be paralyzing.
Clarisse Thorn recently offered ethical dating advice for men who might otherwise be lured by pickup artistry. Amanda Marcotte responded with a smart, useful article which can be boiled down to three maxims: 1) women are your sexual equals, 2) go after women who are in your league and 3) find some real self-confidence, kid.
These are necessary starting points. But I want to get specific about the actual pickups, because I’ve been a victim of poorly executed pickups, as have most girls I know. There is nothing wrong with picking someone up in a bar, but you can do it with integrity—and without a furry hat.
The Approach:
When I was single and going out to “unz unz” nightclubs, I didn’t hook up with guys who approached me. A stranger approaching me throws me out of my comfort zone. Here’s why: women get this shit all the time. We get it waiting for the bus at 7 a.m., carrying our groceries home, hobbling in heels: unwanted howls and come-ons. Sudden attention throws us into an scary, uncomfortable space we’re all too familiar with—and want out of. This is why my advice to guys is don’t randomly approach. Just don’t.
Looking back on my $13 martini days, I did hook up with a lot of guys I approached. And I chose guys who made friendly eye contact with me, who smiled, who struck up a conversation when we were near each other and unoccupied. Try letting women come to you.
The Opener:
You’ve experienced a pickup if you’ve heard things like, “Hey, what’s this from: ‘Nobody puts Baby in a corner’?” or “You look like trouble.” To which, four years ago, I would be like, “No, I’m ‘&Hearts’; ‘Trouble’ is Katie’s MySpace name. I think she’s here, though.”
But I get it—opening conversations can be tough. So here is my secret tip: smile and say hi.
The Conversation:
It can be hard keeping a conversation going. My recommendation is to be in the moment—be spontaneous, not rehearsed. And be real—true to yourself and the things you care about.
After “Hi,” try some personal insight—it doesn’t have to be worked out all the way. Open with how strange life is instead of how weird the weather has been. The best conversations aren’t ones where you talk about movies and TV and books and music, but about your ideas and feelings in the moment—about what it’s like to experience this odd life. It’s about getting at the human experience. It’s about sparking empathy as well as interesting conversation. Finding yourself in one of these conversations feels like suddenly finding yourself stranded on an island with this person.
The Consent
Back in those nightclubs, it wasn’t rare that I’d find my Long Island–swilling wing-lady trapped. There she would be, cornered, clearly uncomfortable, as she recited “312-728 …” to some creep with his cellphone out.
Often, women can’t say no to giving out the number when asked. Most of us are brought up from an early age to be cordial and accommodating. This is why my own cellphone is filled with multiple contacts named “Do Not Answer.”
So? Pay attention. Is she enthusiastic about talking to you? Is she warm toward you? Engaging you further? If not, don’t keep on her—or ask for her number, for chrissake! And because, apparently, it needs to be said: if you continually send a woman messages online or via text and she doesn’t respond—back off. Being relentless may work in the movies, but in the real world it’s called harassment.
Clarisse shared a particularly dark ploy of pickup when it comes to sex: the freeze out. It’s where a girl says she doesn’t want to go any further and the PUA relies on passive aggressiveness—instead of the less fancy aggressive aggressiveness—to pressure her. If they are in bed, he will turn away, check his phone, blow out the candles. Again, women are conditioned to keep the peace, to keep others from being angry at us. We are taught that what we have to offer socially is our looks, our sexuality. For this reason, it becomes easy for her to cave when the guy pulls away emotionally. Guys, do you really want to have sex with someone who doesn’t want to have sex with you?
If you’re hooking up, know it is partly your responsibility as a sex partner to gauge how connected and enthusiastic the other half seems, and communicate. (This becomes necessary, for example, if your partner is drunk.)
You’ll have sex when the girl wants to have sex with you too—it’s a partnered dance. Prepare for the possibility that it might take more than one night (sorry). Gauge your partner’s enthusiasm and participation level; great sex comes when both partners are communicating and on the same page.
Understanding Women? Understand Yourself
PUAs use neuro-linguistic programming tactics, a part of cognitive behavioral therapy, to manipulate women through verbal ticks, pauses, body language … spinning hypnotist wheels pulled from a back pocket (which probably doubles as “peacocking gear”).
But why not use psychology to understand yourself? Facing why you are scared of hitting on women, analyzing why your relationships have failed, and engaging in some self-work is going to be more help with women than any hack.
Rejection is scary—we all want to be accepted. The fear of hitting on people is a shared human experience. What’s also shared is that none of us are perfect at it. At times, we are all going to mess up, say something stupid (You’re hot!), and blow an opportunity (whether real or imagined).
Pickup artistry might temporarily mask your insecurity, but it won’t address it in any meaningful way. Real confidence comes from accepting and loving yourself, not manipulating others’ insecurities.
This piece was inspired by and ran on The Good Men Project: An alternative men’s magazine. I cannot stress clicking that link enough–for fascinating conversations on what it means to be a man, check them out.
47 Comments
Fabulous write-up on PUA tactics from a female perspective! I’ve pretty lenient toward PUAs; one of my good friends had read all the books and even went to a Mystery seminar, and his tactics were working on me until I happened to stumble upon “The Game”, which I consider recommended-reading for any woman looking to arm herself against these guys. But in my experience, newbie PUAs are generally good guys at heart who – as you and Amanda pointed out – just need some real self-confidence. You know how the song goes, though: pimpin’ ain’t easy – especially when you’re selling yourself.
So if I had one good thing to say about the core of PUA “gimmicks”, it’s that they do help to make the guys understand that rejection isn’t the end of the world, and that confidence *can* be cultivated. I used to be a mentor in an online community for internet daters, most of them men who didn’t realize how awkward and unappealing they came across in their profiles and emails. So anything that helps a guy realize his value, and that being snubbed by a foxy lady doesn’t diminish his self-worth, is a good thing – but to a point. When it gets into manipulation, “negs”, NLP – that’s where it goes too far. And I love that savvy ladies like you, Rabbit, are telling it like it is and helping to point guys in the right direction!
Thanks honey! Yeah I agree: the negs, assigning consent, pressuring is where it all takes a stark turn to REALLY! NOT OKAY! I’ve also known shy, nerdy guys who have told me they’ve used PUA out of desperation and it makes sense, but I hope more people (ladiezz and menzz) can open up about alternatives!
Listen to Miss Scarlett gurrrls, if you haven’t read The Game or at least watched the TV shows, or skimmed online you should. You will be astounded at how many of these lines you’ve actually heard! Sorry to steal your game, guys, but come on it’s all out there.
I agree with Scarlett, having walked that path – confidence for some is not something easy to come by.
I learned a few things that have made a huge difference picking up ladies: The first is to consider (and respect) that she may just be having a bad day, and that the last thing on her wish list is for a guy to pick her up. The follow up of this: It’s not personal. It never was. She could just be having a bad day. The second was to realise that each encounter should be treated as if it was your last, but also as if it was the first of many, because at the end of the night it will only ever be one of those two possibilities. So don’t hold back, but at the same time don’t do anything you’ll both regret. And the last one? Find happiness within first. You can throw up a facade of happiness and fool some ladies you’re trying to pick up, but the worthwhile ones will see straight through that and you’ll regret losing them forever.
Thanks for the honesty, Kris. I also want to add that self-confidence is a journey. It’s not like you arrive at “loving yourself” and that is it. It takes time, it ebbs and flows, some days are up some are down. But my advice, for everyone, is to remember to love and accept yourself, and to make this your mantra. To literally remind yourself internally (and silently) as you are flirting with someone new: “I love and accept myself no matter what”.
Many of the guys desperate enough for pickup advice do not get approached by women except once in a blue moon, so this advice has limited applicability to them. And a lot of women react perfectly positively to being approached, if it is done while giving off the right vibes for the situation.
But part of this is going to depend on culture, too. A female friend of mine who grew up in Washington DC moved to Portland, OR, and was shocked that hardly anyone cat-called her or harassed her in Portland. So “women get this shit all the time” actually really depends on who/where we are talking about. The USA is quite varied in terms of local cultural norms. Not to mention people in other countries (pickup culture is not limited to the USA).
Similarly, the women-approaching-men thing is also culturally dependent. In a lot of places it is still considered weird for women to approach men, so men are forced to make the first approach (which is an interesting double-bind for guys in areas where harassment is also common).
I guess what I am getting at is this: things are a lot more complex than PUA makes it out to be, but things are also a lot more complex than any of the feminist responses (save possibly Clarisse’s) make it out to be.
Lastly, the “try letting women come to you” idea is actually precisely what peacocking is about (e.g. “furry hats”). Depending on the PUA’s you talk to, anyway. The point of peacocking is to give other people something easy to open with. If someone wants to talk to you, it is best to remove as many barriers to that as possible, and being dressed weird gives them a highly convenient excuse to talk to you without them having to fret about what to say. “Hey, nice hat.”
Agreed: pre-formulated openers are generally a bad idea. Guys who struggle with conversation would do well to take improv classes:
1. You learn to think on your feet and be responsive to other people under pressure.
2. A lot of long-form improvisation has substantial similarities to how conversations tend to function/flow.
However, learning how to flirt is a bit trickier, and there aren’t a lot of resources for learning it. Except pick up. Conversation was never a problem for me. Flirting was.
Everything you have written in this section is spot-on and true. But also… a little patronizing, and I think targeted to the wrong audience.
There is a subset of pickup that desperately needs to hear this, for sure (e.g. “make the ho say no”). But most pickup I have read is contingent on the idea that the goal is to get women to want to spend time with you/talk to you/kiss you/sleep with you/date you/whatever your goals are. In fact, most of the “accomplishment” in PUA is in becoming sexually desirable to women, not in sleeping with them per se (although this varies, of course).
I will also note that much of my journey into pickup was due to struggling with paralysis over worrying too much about the other person’s consent. That may sound weird, and I think is completely and utterly foreign on feminist radar. But it actually exists, and some guys have this problem. And for those guys, this is the opposite of what they need to hear, because it is already hyper-hyper-ingrained in them in a twisted way.
What those guys need to hear is this: yes, women are often raised to have difficulty saying no and to be highly amiable to everyone. But it is also not your responsibility to tip-toe around women (i.e. adults) as if they are delicate flowers/children that are incapable of communicating and looking out for themselves. In fact, tip-toeing around them like that is disrespectful of them as adult human beings.
Intentionally exploiting people’s issues is one thing. Accidentally stumbling across them while behaving reasonably is completely another. And you should not paralyze yourself by constantly worrying about the latter. Be mindful of people’s (both men’s and women’s) issues, but remember that they are adults who can (or should be able to) take care of themselves to a reasonable extent.
Also: it is okay to experiment. If you are “that guy” some nights, it is not some huge crime. You haven’t murdered or raped anyone. At worst, you have made a few people uncomfortable. Which is not good, but making a woman uncomfortable is no worse crime than someone making you uncomfortable. So do not beat yourself up over it. Instead, learn from the experience. Try to figure out what you did that made them uncomfortable, and try to think of alternate ways to behave. You cannot learn any skill if you are unwilling to experiment and make mistakes while learning. This is simply the nature of reality.
What guys are you talking to? I mean, if they answered “yes”, then you are probably up-the-creek trying to talk to them at all. So why try to drive this point home with a (IMO) patronizing rhetorical question?
Freeze-outs are typically intended to get past the “slut defense”, as it is called in PUA parlance. The idea being that women often have difficulty getting over the idea that they should not sleep with someone they have just met, etc. even when they want to. In other words, all the things a woman might be called a “slut” for doing.
But, of course, I agree that freeze-outs are bad and potentially dangerous. You should not do them. It is impossible to know why someone is resisting, and often it will not be because deep-down they actually want to, but just feel blocked by social norms. (Although, admittedly, it is a little weird if they are heavy-making-out with you in bed with the lights turned off, presuming of course they were enthusiastic about getting into that situation. But you do not have to understand someone to respect their no, obviously.)
However, I do think it is 100% reasonable and okay for a guy to stop a make-out session (or anything else) if things are not leading to sex. Speaking as a guy, that can be a frustrating situation to be in, and continuing just because you do not want to accidentally do a “freeze out” is a really bad idea, and can lead to feelings of resentment on your part. Better to stop things and do something else. But do it with positive vibes (i.e. before you are frustrated), and actually do something with her. And if this sort of situation happens regularly, then she probably is not someone for you, and you should move on to someone who is more compatible.
Real confidence comes from positive experiences that validate said confidence. Otherwise it is arrogance (e.g. believing you can win a marathon without reason to back it up). If these guys do not have experiences that validate that some non-negligible percentage of women find them desirable, where exactly are they supposed to get that confidence from?
The whole “true confidence springs from within” thing is hollywood silliness, IMO, along the lines of “finding your one true love”. Eventually confidence comes from within. And sometimes it starts out that way. But usually it has to initially be built up from external experiences.
And I would argue that a lot of the point of pickup is to get guys those first experiences. After having several positive experience using pickup, I stopped using the gimmicks entirely (although I still use the broader lessons that seem valid to me, like managing the empty spaces in interactions, body language, etc.). What I really needed was a confidence boost, and despite my best efforts I could not manage that without some positive external experiences.
Something I would tell these guys, though, is this: women’s sexuality is not nearly as valuable as you think it is. And it is therefore not an accomplishment to get women to sleep with you. Sleeping with someone is about mutual need/desire, and you are providing them with just as much (if not more, provided you read some good material like The Guide To Getting It On) as they are providing you. You are a benefit to the women you sleep with, not a detriment.
Love it. Rachel, I’m going to respond to this in a longer blog post on honeyandlance. But, wanted to respond to a couple of points off the cuff.
Negs and The Game are old old PUA techniques, like 10 years old. Think of it like version 1.0 where we’re now up to version 4.0. There are so many better and more refined systems out there for seduction that negs just aren’t used that much by skilled seducers. Unfortunately, version 1.0 is still out there because of the popularity of the The Game and the TV show.
On the other hand, teasing is and will always be a part of flirting…and negs are just another way of saying teasing. So, when I say “Wow, you’re such a blogger nerd but I think it’s kind of hot!” I’m teasing you and establishing a connection that’s legit.
The point of the tease/neg is this. A lot of socially awkward guys are intimidated by very attractive women, to the point where they would put them on pedestal and never consider teasing or otherwise having fun with these girls. That’s unattractive to everyone. So what the neg teaches you is it’s okay to poke fun at hot women, because we’re all the same and we all need to be made fun of. Just don’t do it with a mean spirit and you’re fine.
Last two points. One, women do not approach regular guys or guys who are short/fat/plain looking in clubs. They just don’t. So these guys have to take the reins to find women. That’s the way it is. Two, there’s no such thing as out of your league. We’re all in the same league and we’re all playing the same game, whether we like it or not.
There is a misconception about the pickup community that it is about “hacking” women or in some way short circuiting their programming and their ability to make decisions. Something on the level of maybe date rape. Given your clearly limited knowledge of what actually goes on in the pickup community, it’s understandable that you might feel this way about it, but it couldn’t be further from what’s actually going on.
Pickup is a self help movement. It’s about personal growth, turning boys into men. Empowering them to have control in their dating life. As a woman, you take for granted that you have your choice of men, but if you’re a man who has “gotten lucky” a couple of times in his life, you don’t have that sense of choice. Try to imagine for a second what it feels like for a man to walk by hot women every day of your life and never be able to touch one, hold one, kiss one, experience any kind of validation from one. And you’re really never going to be able to fully understand, because as a woman you are completely incapable of comprehending how much the male brain is turned on just by the sight of a the female figure.
There’s this bullshit belief that it is “superficial” to be attracted to someone’s looks, but attraction is not a choice. Just because as a woman cares much more about a man’s personality and how he carries himself than she does about what he looks like, does not mean that it is wrong for men to like boobs. It’s hardwired into our DNA to be attracted to looks, just like it’s hardwired into your DNA to be attracted to fame, power, dominance etc.
Browsing the self help section of a bookstore, you will find books on many many different topics, including sales, job interviews, and countless other forms of persuasion. All of these books teach some form of *gasp* NLP, either directly or indirectly. Many people who are naturally gifted at salesmanship have been raised in a way that causes them to naturally speak in NLP. Given that this is the case, why is it okay for these guys to use NLP but it’s not okay for someone else to come along and teach themselves NLP and integrate it in as part of their personality? And to be perfectly honest, I don’t find NLP particularly effective or compelling, but NLP derived concepts are so ingrained in the language of persuasion that you really can’t get around it.
What this really comes down to is this: you think that people should take what they can get. They should have no ambition. They should settle. I think that we should strive for greatness in everything we do. That means going after that hot chick who is “out of your league” because she makes the sperm in your testicles bounce around, and you want to know what she looks like with your cum in her eye. If that means that you need to improve yourself, go for it if you dare. It won’t be fast, and it won’t be easy, but it is possible, and if you are committed enough to that goal, I can point you in the right direction in the form of coaches, books, blogs, etc to help you get there.
This made me laugh quite a bit- you’re really good at putting these awkward truths into words! Great post!
Because women get hit on all the time, you aren’t going to have any luck unless you are Adonis. Few of us are, and fewer still are aware of that fact. Better to be available and talk with the women who approach you and make the first comment. Just be prepared that the comment is not always a come-on invitation, but really is just a request for specific information. If you don’t get a response to the follow-up comment, move on. If even 1% of the women in the world are interested in you, that is roughly 67 million women. One is bound to show up sooner or later – and she might even be compatible with you!
Men tend to make things more complicated than they really have to, it’s just the way things are. I agree that meeting women can be scary especially if you’re a shy guy. But heres the facts. It’s a mans job usually to approach a woman and ask her out. This is why it’s important to actually go out and create the fun and interesting life that attracts others to you. If you are actually doing the unique things that you are talking about then theres no need to make them up. Yes, this is alot more work than taking the shortcut route of fake stories, but what happens when she finds out that everything you said was fake? Create the life you want, gain some confidence and accomplish goals. And remember nobody can resist a genuine, real person that polite, funny, interesting and has amazing conversational skills.
Okay, so all to all the PUA’s here and just all the guys:
Here is the thing, I WANT to like PUA’s and their techniques more than I do. They have some interesting ideas about human interaction and I like the use of studying body language and to an extent psychology/science to learn more about dating. I think those can be really cool.
Yes I made some jokes at the expense of Mr. Mystery and yes I am contemptuous of the “black magic” techniques used by PUA’s. It makes my blood boil thinking about guys manipulating consent, etc.
I mean I guess what I want to hear from the PUA community are the ways different people are navigating these problem areas and trying to use the techniques for good. I want to hear about this from you guys. I think you guys have made some great points here, but it seems we disagree that there is anything problematic about the PUA community. Maybe we disagree on WHAT is problematic, but I don’t know. I am sure there are some guys using PUA techniques without the ethical probs, and I want to know more about that endeavor.
Also a personal question for PUA’s: Looking back on times I’ve been hit on by PUA’s without knowing it–whether it was magic tricks, opening lines, etc. there was one thing that always left me unnerved. I often thought these guys talking to me seemed asexual or maybe even sometimes gay–like they were not hitting on me. I know the gay thing is a technique, but I’ve got to say that when the guy then segwayed from my non sexual friend to hitting on me, it made me MORE uncomfortable than if he’d ambushed me from the beginning… Is this actually a phenomenon/what is going on with that/thoughts?
I can’t comment on the gay technique thing except to say that it sounds really gay. I’m hyper masculine all the time.
I also have to disagree with Hammer above re: the “Hi” opener, I use it all the time and it works great. I’ve tried a zillion other openers and for some reason whatever vibe I’m projecting Hi just works best. It’s indirect and non-threatening. Also, if I’m out on the town, I often open with “Hey, how is your night going?” and that gets the ball rolling. Simple, effective.
Too, Rachel, next time you’re in Orlando, we need to make out
Lance, I don’t disagree with the use of “hi” as an opener, but for a guy with limited social skills, it’s probably not particularly effective at initiating an interesting conversation. I typically think of “hi” as a pre-opener, and will often move into some other kind of opener, either direct, indirect or situational.
I acknowledge there are problems with the pickup community, but there are problems with any large scale movement, including feminism. The pickup community has a ton of charlatan marketers who don’t know what the fuck their doing, or can get laid, but it’s always in an empty way because they’re sociopathic and incapable of connecting emotionally. Like masturbating inside a warm body. Even so, that doesn’t mean they can’t teach a guy how to approach and get numbers. At the height of the PUA comminity’s popularity, which was probably ’09 or so, most of the guys who were coming into the community were normal, they just basically needed someone to tell them to grab their sack and go up to hot chicks. A guy who doesn’t get laid, but is able to open, hook and get number closes and makeouts can still help these people to a point. Beyond that point, those guys generally aren’t committed enough to work at it any further, since they’ve never hit rock bottom.
Still, there are guys who are doing innovative stuff, empowering masculinity, and helping their students grow into more attractive versions of themselves. Some of these men choose to use their new found capacity to sleep with 50 new women a year, others get into a long term relationship that is extremely fulfilling for both parties due to the masculine/feminine polarity. Myself, I’ve had a string of short to medium term non-exclusive relationships over the last two years or so since my last LTR ended.
You’re creating a false dichotomy in talking about “using these techniques for good.” It’s super judgmental. There’s nothing unethical about any relationship between two consenting adults. If two people are having fun and turning each other on, who cares if it’s the result of magic tricks or negs or NLP? What’s important is that it is consensual and they’re both enjoying themselves. And there’s no such thing as “manipulating consent.” The most you can do is manipulate emotions, but even in that context, the word “manipulation” is not really appropriate, since the emotions that the person is feeling are real, regardless of how contrived the routine used to generate that emotion was.
Speaking more to this point about “manipulating consent,” I probably should have hit on your thing about freeze outs being passive-aggressive in my first post, but it was getting long and so I skipped it. When you freeze a girl out (which for my money is also a dated technique), you’re basically reciprocating behavior that she’s showing you. Look, if we’re in my bed together, and I’ve got your top off, have been making out with you, sucking on your boobs and neck, kissing down your stomach etc, and then as I try to unbutton your pants, you tell me to stop, it’s not passive aggressive if I stop. You’re spiking a negative emotion in my by telling me no, so in turn, I’m reciprocating a negative emotion in you by withdrawing the kissing and sucking. It’s kind of behaviorist, but as far as “manipulating consent” it is far less nefarious than using KFP, which taps into evolutionarily programmed lower brain animalistic urges to make a hard cock cum, overriding any kind of rational resistance. If you do a search for NetVideoGirls or NVG on any porn tube site, you’ll find videos of the California Pimp using KFP successfully.
The likelihood of an advanced pickup guy having hit on you with you knowing it is very small. The more advanced the guy is, the more calibrated he is, which will inevitably make the interaction more natural. The best guys out there, say Captain Jack, Hypnotica, Brad P, Jason Savage or Steve “El Topo” Mayeda, are so calibrated that they literally can pick up just about anyone, although they would never admit to that because for them that’s not the goal. Once you get to a certain point, the goal is no longer to bang the first hot chick you see, it’s to connect. Banging some chick who you haven’t really connected with is empty.
I did want to circle back and shit on feminism for a second, because the whole PUA community is a backlash against the feminist movement, and while you and I’m sure a large percentage of your readers self-identify as feminist, the percentage of the rest of the world who self-identify that way is very small, and for good reason. The roots of feminism lie in a women’s rights movement, but somewhere along the way it lost its way, and became less about equality and more about sameness. There is a large degree to which gender roles are hard coded in our DNA, and trying to fight these gender roles makes for unhappy relationships and a 55% divorce rate. It makes for women using sex as a bargaining chip, emasculating their boyfriends and husbands, and at the same time being unhappy with their man’s indecisiveness, his appeasement,and his overall niceness. The masculine-feminine polarity is what makes attraction, it’s what makes sex hot. Women ARE naturally submissive to POWERFUL men. They want us to lead, be decisive try to get them naked.
I’m very much with you on feminism being problematic and that being a good analogy. I struggle with feminism all the time and whether I want to identify a a feminist because of hte problems I see in the community. I am sure you relate with PUA.
The freeze-out thing makes much more sense when you put it that way. While there might be people using it as a passive aggressive technique, I think mirroring like you put it can be healthy! As long as there is also open communication about what everyone is feeling. Or least as long as that is what is striven for.
Do I want to google KFP? This seems intense :S
As far as the rant against feminism, you know I do see some of what you are saying (like women using sex as a bargaining chip or emasculating men, this happens and I want to talk more about it) but I don’t think it FULLY goes back to evolutionary psychology and being coded in our DNA.
How much of it is natural and how much of it is just a gender role we are groomed for? Is it even possible to separate the two? So, for instance, I am bisexual. When I am with a girl I like to be dominant. Is this my natural tendency or am I absorbing a cultural message of this is how you hit on a girl/what you do? It gives me something to think about, anyway.
Just for the record, I also think it’s dangerous to generalize and say that women are naturally submissive to men. Some women are sexually submissive with men, but not all of course.
Also TopHogg, when I approach men I rarely go for the culturally sanctioned hotties. I go for the guys who look interesting to me, guys whose look I like or who somehow feel safe to me. I often like guys with a belly or who are nerdy who look totally average but interesting. I did sometimes pick up gorgeous guys, but not usually. I mean this is where I want to get curious about Hammer’s use of evolutionary psychology. I feel like what makes me go for certain guys is probably pheromones over looks. I am always drawn to certain men in any crowd, and very rarely is it the hyper masculine or perfectly good looking ones.
When I was talking about men being naturally dominant and women being naturally submissive, I was referring more to relationship dynamics and less to sexual dynamics. The psychology of sexual fetishism is something that I’m not particularly interested in, though I know that in many cases the D/s relationship can extend beyond the bedroom. In any case, I feel like these are the exceptions that prove the rule. And while I have no experience with this, I suspect that even the most sexually dominant of females are more comfortable submitting to a dominant male than dominating a submissive male.
If you and I were to meet out at a bar, and we start talking and kind of hit it off… .. we’d exchange numbers with plans to schedule a date. When we’re scheduling that date, I may ask you some questions about your availability/neighborhood/interests/etc. but eventually I am going to say “Meet me at Beauty Bar on Tuesday at 8:30″ as opposed to “Cool, I’m free on Tuesday too. Where would you like to go/what would you like to do?”
It’s a small example, but I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been out on a date with someone and gotten complimented for being decisive. Dominance means that when we’re making out, I’m going to grab your hair near the scalp and give it a little tug, not too hard but enough that you know it’s deliberate and that the second we’re alone, I will tear you apart and you’ll love it. Dominance means that if we’re talking about a topic and it’s not going anywhere or the place it’s going is going to hurt the interaction, I’ll interrupt you mid-sentence with an obvious conversation change because I am in tuned enough with your emotions to sense a shift.
“Try letting women come to you.”
Women have the choice to approach or wait to be approached, most men don’t. And if it’s fairly useless advice for most men, it’s disastrously BAD advice for the shy or socially awkward men who I assume are your target audience. They are already reluctant to approach women, and now your giving them hopes that they can meet women by remaining wallflowers.
It’s great that approaching men worked for you, but you are part of a small minority of women who take the initiative. “Try letting women come to you.” will remain bad advice until some sizeable percentage of women actively approach men on a regular basis.
Plowboy, it’s interesting, the “let women come to you” approach is something I used in dating, but it also is a huge part of the swinger community as well as other kinky circles. In the swinger community, the women have control in who does what. The women approach. This keeps everyone feeling safe and okay. And I do like this approach, but I am with you, it’s hard if most girls don’t do it! And , it’s kinda hard for me to believe, since that is my go-to. But this conversation has me thinking I need to write to women about this phenomenon. And like I said, I in no way only approached “studs” or hot guys. I actually approached a shy nerdy guy who had a hard time hitting on women, and he ended up becoming my husband.
This has turned into the most fascinating comment thread!
Rachel, I had been thinking more about your advice about letting women approach, and I think these fellas are spot-on when they say women almost *never* do it. I personally never have, and from time spent in bars, cafés and the like, I don’t remember observing a woman taking that tack. However, if a woman doesn’t make the approach, she can take *huge* strikes towards making herself approachable. Smiling, not shying away from eye contact, not burying herself in something that would be hard to tear her away from. I was in a café once after reading about the “gaze/smile/hold eye contact” technique, so I tried it on a guy across the room. The author (sadly can’t remember where I read it) said that if the guy doesn’t approach after the third cycle, to move on to someone else. Sure enough, he approached me after the second go-round and bought me a coffee; he even remarked how approachable I seemed. But women, especially when they’re in groups, sometimes cultivate a closed-off persona in public. It’s interesting; often they focus so much on looking sexy and “come hither”, that they forget all about making their body language appealing as well.
The most bothersome thing for me in regards to PUA is that there’s no female equivalent. I don’t mean a “defense against PUAs” thing, but a genuine method for teaching women similar techniques for building self-esteem, being approachable, cultivating confidence in pick-up friendly situations, etc. Many women are just as shy or uncomfortable as the guys who seek out PUA advice, and while there are a few books out there that point out the mistakes women make in dating/relationships (“He’s Just Not That Into You” and “Why Men Love Bitches” come to mind), they’re much more focused on conduct *after* you start dating someone.
One thing I’ve always respected about PUA techniques is that they emphasize that a guy doesn’t have to be the hottest, buffest, richest, most successful, etc guy to be successful at approaching women. But if the resultant PUAs are groomed to primarily go after “hot women” (and sure, that’s subjective to some degree), that means the more average-looking ladies will either be flirted with as a means to getting closer to the hot ones, or will be largely ignored. A PUA style methodology for women that promotes confidence without making a her feel like she has to aspire to look a certain way would be a great benefit to a lot of women, I would think.
@Rachel:
My apologies if I came across as implying there is nothing wrong with the PUA community. There is a lot of problematic stuff in PUA, absolutely. (Gunwitch being the poster-boy of that…) And because of that I don’t identify as a PUA. But I have gained things from the community, and my life has absolutely been improved by it, so it irks me a little when I feel like people are writing it off whole-sale.
Similarly, I don’t identify as feminist, but I still have gained from it, and feel like it has had a positive impact in a lot of people’s lives.
Incidentally, PUA and feminism have actually been good at counterbalancing each other, for me. That they disagree on a lot of things is actually really useful, IMO.
Of course, it is a little difficult to talk about “feminism” and “pickup” as singular entities. I suspect there is about as much variance within each (e.g. big difference between Mary Daly and Betty Friedan, and between Gunwitch and Style). Whenever someones identifies as feminist or PUA, I’m always tempted to ask, “Which kind?”
The theory is that ignoring/not showing interest in the person you actually want, will make them want you/want to interact with you more. It is attempting to exploit the whole “you want what you can’t have” bit of human nature. For some women this actually does work, but a lot of the techniques around it are assholish and just plain mean.
I think an evolution of that theory is the PUA techniques about managing the empty spaces in interactions (as I broadly classify them). And the difference is that instead of saying, “People want what they can’t have,” which often isn’t true (how many people want to suffocate to death in outer space?), instead of that, you say, “People cannot want what they already have.”
So, for example, a woman will not have an opportunity to want to flirt with you if you immediately flirting with her. The emphasis in this case is not in trying to “make” someone want you, but rather the emphasis is on not crowding out/over-saturating their experience to the point where they do not have the opportunity to want you.
There is also an extent to which you can play with denial (e.g. giving tastes of things, but never quite delivering) under this theory to garner/amp-up more desire. But the desire still has to be there in the first place.
And it is a balance. You want the empty spaces to be there, for their desire to fill, but you do not want to exhaust them with denial or make them feel unduly played with, either. And, of course, you want to treat them like a human being.
Ditto, but with respect to women.
Incidentally, that’s something thing that bugs me about many variants of PUA: the emphasis on so-called “10′s”. I get that you need to be attracted to someone; I am the same way. But they don’t need to be the hottest thang evar. Frankly, most women are plenty physically attractive. For me it’s more about other things, like whether I can relate to them, how interesting they are, whether they seem like decent human beings, etc.
But I think for the guys that do the “10″ thing, it’s more about using the woman’s attractiveness as validation of their own desirability. It can be like a form of status. Which is off-putting in itself, IMO. But at the same time, for guys that have never or rarely felt desirable (as was the case for me pre-PUA), I can see the allure.
I should add, regarding this:
Not only that, but the women on whom those techniques do work are probably not the stable personalities I want to get involved with. If simply not being able to have something is enough to make them want it, then regardless of whether it is deep insecurities or narcissism or whatever that makes them that way, I do not want to touch them with a ten foot pole.
Gah. Okay, third post in a row.
Rachel, I misread this:
I thought with “friend” you were referring to a third party (i.e. he was talking to your friend and ignoring you, and then switched to hitting on you). But I see now you were talking about a one-on-one interaction with you the entire time.
This is curious to me, because I get the impression that it is often off-putting/icky to many women if you immediately start hitting on them off-the-bat. In theory, you are supposed to ramp up slowly (relatively speaking), checking for signs of discomfort/desire along the way to help gage how fast you should go (or whether you should back off entirely). Even most feminist writing I’ve seen on the subject seems to indicate that immediately hitting on a woman is icky (Nice Guy(tm) notwithstanding).
Could you provide a specific example of what you are talking about? This seems quite interesting to me, and I would love to figure out what it is more specifically that made those interactions uncomfortable for you.
Xakudo, yes. So I have a specific example from guys I realized later were PUA’s, they had sort of like mentioned that they were gay, but didn’t come out and say it. So we are hanging out thinking these two guys we think are gay but then they start hitting on us and this makes me feel really nervous. My guard has been let down, I am being more flirty and out there then I would be normally because I feel like I am with “the girls” so to speak–the people who aren’t going to be interested. This left me feeling miffed and confused.
On less specific examples, I’ve had guys come up to me who I wouldn’t normally be interested in but they seem nice and are saying something funny/or in one example doing a magic trick, so I engage. It’s like I wouldn’t normally be interested, but since they aren’t hitting on me, fine we can be friends. But then the hitting on me comes later and I feel a bit like I’ve been cornered and tricked. And it makes me uncomfortable. Does that make sense?
Scarlett,
That is great advice. And I think that should be added to me “let women come to you” bit, go after women who seem open, who seem to have an interest–not the ones with their noses buried in books or who are out with friends, of course! I think you and I need to talk more about the female equivalent of PUA tactics, this is a juicy area! I don’t want to say that when I was single I was a female PUA, but I picked up a lot of women and men and I had my plans and tactics on how to do it. I knew what worked, for me. I am curious, if you are single, would you try going out and picking up a dude? Why or why not?
I’d love to, Miss Rachel! As said, I’ve always found the lack of a female PUA-style methodology to be a glaring omission when it comes to women-oriented dating literature. The guys get interesting stuff like “The Game”, and we get drivel like “The Rules” and “How to Marry Your Soulmate in 86 Easy Steps”. (Gag!)
I ended a relationship back in February, and I’ve been thinking about my tactics when I decide to pursue dating again, since I’ve been 2 years out of the scene. I’ve always had the best success with online dating; working from home, I don’t have a workplace social circle and most of my close local friends are guys, so going out for “a night on the town with my girlfriends” isn’t really an option. Another thing, which ironically I think would work well for me if I was a dude, is that I easily stand out in a crowd (I’m a 5’11″ redhead), and that seems to be intimidating for guys when it comes to the approach. Plus I happily identify with being a geek, and I find a lot of the fellas I have the most in common with also eschew the typical bar/café scene. Online dating has its own set of quirks, but since I totally relate with what you said about liking guys who are “nerdy, more average looking, but interesting”, there are often far more to choose from online than in your typical bar. Bonus!
Would I be willing to try some lady PUA ideas out on the town though? Absolutely – but there’s a caveat. As you said in your last comment, a woman who’s out with friends is automatically going to seem less open, but it would naturally take a very confident woman to go to a bar or club alone. Therein lies the paradox for me; I think I need to find places outside the drinking scene that are conducive to meeting interesting people. I think I need to move to a more interesting town, stat!
@Rachel:
I can definitely see why that would leave a bad taste in your mouth, absolutely. Intentionally misrepresenting yourself certainly is not a positive tactic.
But I think the idea behind it is, indeed, to get you to let your guard down, to lower your shields, to feel more comfortable with them. Which it sounds like is exactly what happened, at least at first.
Our culture has a pretty deeply ingrained notion that male sexuality is sociopathic (e.g. “protecting” teenage girls from their male counterparts, etc.), so convincing a woman that your sexuality is not ‘targeted’ at her can put her at ease.
But absolutely, trying to hack that (IMO problematic, and deserving of hackage) cultural notion should not be done in a dishonest way like that.
Yeah, it makes sense.
Does it also make sense to you that many women find it off-putting to be immediately hit on?
I feel like this is one of those situations where different women expect/want different things, and unless you ask them “Would you like me to immediately start hitting on you, or do you want to have a normal conversation first?” it is not really possible to know who wants what.
So I do not think this particular PUA tactic is intended to be misleading. And many variants of PUA emphasize not being “outcome dependent”. So in those variants a PUA should actually be happy to just enjoy a conversation as well (as long as the conversation is good, and presuming something more interesting is not going on elsewhere).
I wonder if the issue for you was that they continued pushing the flirting, even when you were uncomfortable with it? Which is bad tactics on their part anyway, because making someone uncomfortable is a very ineffective way to get more intimate with them or to continue a generally positive friendly interaction.
Lastly (not PUA related, but rather a personal note): I often do not know if I want to flirt with/hit on someone before I get to know them a bit. So the notion that I am supposed to immediately demonstrate my interest at the beginning of an interaction can be a bit of a double-bind for me, because I often don’t know if I am interested or not at that point. I will know if I am physically attracted to them, sure. But before I flirt I want some cursory information to determine if they are interesting and a decent/stable person. This is perhaps not so common amongst PUA’s, but it is relevant to me, at least.
@Scarlett:
Oh god, yes. Please, please, someone please give women some decent female PUA material. Female pickup would be a fascinating discussion topic. It is so completely unexplored in literature.
Xakudo, I agree with you on the male sexuality=predator association in our culture. I think this is what stops men from being a part of sex positive discussions, and I don’t see anyone in the sex positive world stopping and saying, hey this is not okay. This is in part what I wanted to explore in my “Man Series” project. I am curious where else you think this shows up in our society. This is a topic I would love to write about further and get people thinking about.
And yeah I know what you mean about wanting to get to know someone first, I do that and I’ve had that work for me. But I guess there is a different between that and a *total* bait and switch–which doesn’t feel natural.
If someone approaches me to hit on me, I wouldn’t necessarily want them to give me a line first, but pretty quickly in I would want to know what this approach is all about… But I think you are right, at least in a lot of these cases it was pushing the flirting when I was not comfortable with it. Though, I have to say just that bait and switch in others was enough to make me feel unnerved.
So, I also want to get back to an earlier thread–consent. I love what you said about remembering that everyone is responsible for their own consent as an adult. That is true. But I also think that “gray rape” is a real and widespread phenomenon, especially among young women who are going out, drinking, meeting men in club/bar settings (in my experience). But sometimes I wonder, does upholding gray areas of consent as a kind of “rape” or as a “big deal” simply reinforce some sort of virgin/whore dichotomy? Does it keep sex as a precious gift from women that must be given away with gravity and reverence? I wonder, if it should be treated more like “gray areas of consent happen–for everyone regardless of your gender” and it’s okay. Just strive for understanding/gaining tools around navigating it.
Scarlett, curious on your thoughts too.
“Gray areas of consent” – that’s a really excellent way to phrase it. I too appreciate what Xakudo and Hammer said about adults being responsible for their own consent. Most people who frequent bars and clubs are well aware of their limits when it comes to alcohol intake; for me, I know when I start to feel flush and get affectionate and giggly with everyone, my inhibitions and rationality are on the swift decline, and enticing some sexytimes will be that much easier. Whether I choose to pay heed to those indicators is entirely my responsibility, and it’s not up to the dude I’m chatting up to analyze me rationally and decide whether I’m really into it, or if it’s the alcohol talking. Unless he’s been forcibly pouring the drinks down my throat, or I’m so incapacitated that I can barely stand, any consent that’s given should be assumed as genuine.
As far as what Hammer said about “freezing out” women who refuse to go further when making out becomes more sexual, I tend to agree that if she just wants the sensual intimacy and he wants the sex, it’s fair for both to put the brakes on. A guy who kowtows to a woman’s desires but feels irritated or lead on probably isn’t going to have a very high opinion of her, so why feign interest by continuing to be intimate? She may call you some choice names, but unless your interest in her is genuine and goes beyond casual sex, it’s best to call it quits rather than push things and hope that thirty more minutes of smoochin’ can coax consent.
This is another situation where many women are sorely lacking in savvy. Instinctively, we know that it’s not fair to be tease a guy and then withdraw, but we also like to think that men enjoy “just making out” as much as we do. Then when it becomes apparent that the guy wants to go further than our comfort zone, we have to make a choice: either consent to keep the peace (while risking the feelings of shame, regret, lower self-worth, etc that may come later), or forceably say no – and be seen as a cocktease or a bitch.
If I want to play the seductive Siren archtype, I do so knowing that it’s a physical seduction that relies heavily on sexual energy. Someone who charms – relying on personality and wit – can do so without sex entering the equation. I think women all too often try to mash up lots of different archetypes when they go out – look sexy, but be demure; play hard to get, but be intellectually engaging – so it’s no wonder a skilled PUA can root out the mixed signals and be successful. He has the confidence and mindset to know what he wants from the get-go (whether others would find it reprehensible or not) – and that’s certainly something that women could learn a lot from!
Scarlett
Arden Leigh is the only female equivalent that I would recommend to women. She has a book coming out in a few months, might be worth a look.
Still, there isn’t really that much you need to know as a woman. Lose weight, dress cute, make eye contact with guys you find interesting, cultivate positivity in your personality. That’s all there really is to it. If you’ve had trouble losing weight in the past, just jump onto Robb Wolf’s site or Mark Sisson’s site and you’ll have no problem any longer.
All, lots of good thoughts and discussion going on here. My 2cents on the freeze-out thing: it happens in all relationship types too, not just in pickup. Guys, have you ever been dissed by your gf when trying to get laid? Ladies, have you ever used sex to manipulate your man into getting something you wanted? It’s nothing new and we could talk about the ethics of relationships until we’re blue in the face.
On another note, I have long thought about developing or co-developing a pickup system that is designed by both a female and male, so it takes into account her perspective also. It would basically be putting structure and methodology to meeting and dating with goals of being fair, safe, and fun. Anyone interested?
Rachel, I blogged a response to a couple of threads from this, check it out if you’re interested. Thanks for the thought provoking post.
http://honeyandlance.com/pickup-for-feminists
@Hammer – “Lose weight, dress cute …” is the exact kind of banal, superficial advice that would only make women more paranoid about fitting into some ideal of attraction. If accurate, women’s magazines would be more than sufficient for honing seductresses right and left, as dieting and fashion tips are the backbone of their existence.
As said above, I respect that PUA techniques emphasize that a guy doesn’t have to be the “most/best” of any particular trait in order to be successful. A methodology that emphasizes the mental game of seduction and puts women and men on an even playing field – as you suggest, Lance – sounds intriguing.
Hey Scarlett,
I am someone who is very well read on the subject of nutrition, and my blog has a number of posts on the subject. While I wasn’t going to give weight loss advice in that particular comment, I did give you google search terms to sites with a plethora of free information. Losing weight is easy as fuck, and for most people, the difficulty is poor information, not lack of willpower. However, since losing weight is stupid easy, if you have the right information and then don’t act on it, it is now my prerogative to judge you.
As for the assertion that it is in any way superficial for me to want a woman to be thin and fit, I vehemently reject that notion. You wouldn’t call it superficial for a female elk to choose to mate with the male elk that has the biggest antlers, and you wouldn’t call it superficial for a female peacock to mate with the male peacock with the biggest feathers. Men and women are wired differently, and for men, visual attraction is much more important than it is for women. Attraction is not a choice, and it is both naive and immoral for you to expect someone to live in denial of their lack of attraction toward someone for the sake of sparing a woman’s feelings. Check out my post on the subject here: http://www.hammer86blog.com/2011/05/02/fat-positive-and-other-morally-bankrupt-concepts-contributing-to-the-pussification-of-america/
The reason that women’s magazines are not sufficient for honing seductresses is because there is no incentive for a magazine, which has a recurring revenue model, to actually solve a woman’s problems. They give inexcusably shitty advice on everything from sex to diet to exercise to dating to fashion (at least from the perspective of attracting a partner).
@Rachel:
Sure, sure. I guess what I am wondering is–in more concrete terms–what makes the difference between those two. Because to me it is not obvious. Although, so far I do not think I have given people a bait-and-switch impression. But I do not actually know why.
It is also interesting because I think this is the crux of some of the Nice Guy(tm) discourse in feminism, although admittedly they are speaking about longer timelines in that case. So figuring out in more concrete terms what guys should do to give the “getting to know you/testing the waters” vibe instead of the “bait-and-switch” vibe would be really useful, IMO.
Yeah, this is a topic near-and-dear to my heart as well, as it has impacted my life in a lot of ways. There was some discussion about that over at Clarisse’s place on her manliness threads. But it is a big topic. I would love to delve into it more, too.
For the moment, here is an interesting related story from my life: http://undelicatemusings.wordpress.com/2010/12/25/the-seat-switch/
Also, a couple of posts from an awesome blog that is not mine:
http://sexademic.wordpress.com/2011/01/04/brutish-male-sexuality-part-1/
http://sexademic.wordpress.com/2011/01/05/brutish-male-sexuality-part-2/
Yes, absolutely.
(As an aside, some conversations I have had with other guys, combined with some of my own experiences, suggests to me that such things are not actually uncommon in the female -> male direction either. Although that tends to be in the context of relationships, rather than out-on-the-town.)
For me, as I suggested before, the important thing is to recognize the difference between reasonable and unreasonable behavior. If someone is behaving fairly reasonably, and ends up “gray raping” another person, is the onus really on them? Because if it is, then the implication seems to be that tip-toeing around other people is ethically obligatory. And I, at least, am not too keen on navigating in such a world (for a long time, I did).
Of course, people will argue about what constitutes “reasonable” behavior, and it varies by circumstance as well. But for the moment let’s pretend that everyone agrees what it means.
A (male) friend of mine and I were once talking about negative sexual experiences we had in the past, and he mentioned that the first time he had sex could arguably be described as rape (with him being the one raped). And he certainly viewed it as a negative experience.
Similarly, I have had experiences with partners initiating condomless intercourse without my consent (and I know other guys with similar stories). Arguably, that is a form of rape as well. And it was certainly a negative experience for me (I came away from it feeling really icky, and somewhat unsafe).
But both me and my friend got over these experiences. And the thing that I think they have in common is this: we knew the women were not trying to hurt us. They were being highly careless with our consent, and making presumptions about what we wanted/were okay with. But they were not intentionally trying to do anything bad.
And I think it is reasonable in those types of circumstances to look at our own behavior and see what we could have done to better communicate our lack of consent, and to recognize that the experience does not have to be some horrible cloud of fear hanging over us the rest of our lives. And, also, I think it is unreasonable to stigmatize those women beyond just being careless/presumptuous.
But when we look at the reverse situation (men doing similar things to women), people tend to look at it very differently.
You mentioned the virgin/whore dichotomy as something that is reinforced by this. And I think there is definitely an aspect of that to it. I think virgin/whore is also an influence that creates this in the first place. It is cyclic. And I think there are many, many other factors that also contribute, and that are often inter-related (“toxic/sociopathic male sexuality”, for example).
I will re-quote this because I really with it:
Absolutely, I think as long as everyone is acting in good-faith (not everyone is), then the goal is simply to try to improve everyone’s understanding of each other and provide people with tools to help navigate.
And even amongst a population where everyone is a good-faith participant, bad things will still happen sometimes. Because we are human beings, and we are not perfect, and misunderstandings/mistakes happen. And I think it is really important to acknowledge that, and to equip people to deal with that.
Whoops, that should be “I will re-quote this because I really agree with it”.
Wow, these comments have all been really interesting. I actually just finished reading The Game (was not looking for anything related on this blog, but just happened upon this conv0), and although there certainly are aspects of the PUA community I find disturbing, I can totally understand why guys would want to learn these tactics, and how they could help someone become a better person, as long as they did not get too carried away! As both a newly bi-identified woman, as well as someone who has experienced their share of social awkwardness, I can sympathize…
And yes, I would love to see female-oriented PUA material!
Incidentally, I’m quite fond of this guy’s attitudes about pickup (for the most part):
http://www.mypuajourney.com/episode-013-the-interview/
I liked this bit from the interview:
I appreciate the emphasis on becoming okay with rejection–even potentially nasty rejection–when you go into an interaction. It is not about avoiding rejection, but rather about becoming comfortable with it and treating it as just another acceptable outcome. Easier said than done, obviously, and that quote on its own is not actionable advice. But he provides more actionable advice on how to achieve that in the rest of the interview, as well as elsewhere on his site.
One of the things I did early on, based on his exercises, was to go to a mall and force myself to say “hi” (with a friendly smile, of course) to complete strangers (male, female, old, young, whatever). His timer method was really effective for me, because it provided a counteracting force to my approach anxiety. I set a timer for ten minutes, and a goal of saying “hi” to at least 40 people in that time span. And it was really crazy.
The very first person (by coincidence) was a trendy, stereotypically attractive young woman, and she gave me the nastiest, nastiest look in return for my “hi”. And if it weren’t for the timer ticking away, I would have stopped right then, feeling like crap. But forced by my timer, I kept going. And the most remarkable thing happened: I realized it wasn’t about me. I mean, on an intellectual level I already knew that. But after about 30 people I finally grasped it on a gut-emotional-level. Because I did exactly the same thing to everyone, and I got such a range of responses. Some positive, some negative, some just confused, etc. It was totally about them, not me. And that realization was extremely freeing.
I feel like some of the best advice is in the form of exercises like these. Almost social experiments, in a way. Practice and experimentation are all really important–if not critical–to getting past these kinds of psychological/emotional barriers that a lot of guys have. People (or anyone else for that matter) often can’t just internally theorize their issues away. They need external reinforcement in the form of real-world experiences.
So I feel like the best pickup advice is basically a list of exercises to go out into the real world and try, and see what happens, possibly with a goal attached for what to get out of it. It’s not that you will stick with the exercises forever, but the idea is to provide you with experience to see how things work and to discover things about yourself and about social interactions. To help you develop a healthier psychology, and to help you develop your own positive way of interacting with people.
Xakudo, a couple of things I did to work on rejection:
1. I approached 500 women in 3 days a couple of years ago on a college campus. Rejection rate was in the high 90%. After I while it becomes really fun to approach…you have to have a sense of irony about it.
2. Went out 30 days straight and approached 5-10 women per day with the intent of scoring phone numbers. Was tough but my game got much tighter after that.
3. Got a sales job. Sales and pickup are the same thing. In sales, I’ll make 50 calls per day and get less 10% response, just like with chicks. After a couple of months of this, rejection becomes nothing. You realize the target is rejecting your sales pitch, not you as a person.
Xakudo, your “it’s not about you” realization is absolutely spot-on; it reminds me so much of a book I read not too long ago: “The Four Agreements”, one of which stressed that we should never take *anything* personally, because we all live in our own world, so to speak. So as you said, the reactions were so varied and mixed because each person is living their own existence, having bad days or good days, having their own unique perspectives about what it means to be approached by strangers, etc.
In essence, rejection is never about US. It’s a tricky thing to keep in mind when you’re experiencing it, but anyone who can cultivate the habit to not take things personally will be leagues and levels above others – both in terms of PUA and life in general.
@Hammer – I’m not sure where weight loss advice came into this; that you immediately assumed that I desired or needed it is quite presumptuous on your part. Additionally, I never said that YOU (or anyone, for that matter) being attracted to a “fit and thin” woman is superficial; just as I happen to think that geeky dudes with longish hair are hot, I certainly wouldn’t assert that every woman should feel that well. Hell, I’m happier if they don’t: more for me!
What I intended is that the generic, sweeping advice for women “lose weight and dress cute” was superficial. Would you give that advice to a woman who is already physically fit? And “dress cute” is incredibly subjective; certainly a woman who likes a goth, punk or retro style is going to think of stylish dressing much differently than many men would. That’s why an immediate focus on the physical is problematic, from my standpoint, because encouraging women to fit some standard of fitness and/or style is not only telling them they’re not good or worthy enough the way they are – a dangerous trigger for women like Rachel and myself who have struggled with eating disorders in the past – but it takes the emphasis away from cultivating natural confidence, charm and self-esteem, which ultimately will enhance anyone’s life far greater than a makeover will.
I didn’t presume that you wanted to lose weight, I was just pointing out that losing weight is easy, and if anyone here disagrees with that statement, then THEY are now pointed in the right direction.
Physically fit women don’t need advice on how to attract men, they have male suitors all the time. That is why dating advice for women is more about relationship advice than dating advice. That is why you don’t need much advice once you’re hot, just cultivate a positive attitude and be approachable. So again, not superficial because there is nothing superficial about men liking beauty, and male tastes are the 80% the same. Not banal because I am giving anyone who thinks that is easier said than done appropriate direction to take.
Cultivating a natural sense of confidence is all good and well, but has absolutely no value in terms of a woman picking up guys. Certainly it would be useful in terms of relationship game, but again, not what we’re talking about.
@Scarlett @Hammer, IMO women have game and use game whether they realize it or not. Most women are what we call “naturals” and they can manipulate guys to some degree emotionally or with the threat of sex. The weaker the guy, the more pliable they are. (Men can do this too, btw, it just takes a few more steps.) Anyway, what I want to say is women can and should learn about game, both the chick version and the guy version (aka pickup) so they are better equipped to manage social dynamics. The best female relationships I have are with women who know I’m a social artist, understand game themselves, and have a structure and vocabulary to their own game…this enlightenment keeps us on a level playing and a field that is at a higher level than folks not in the know. It’s incredibly liberating.
@ Scarlett & Hammer, Okay obviously, I am with Scarlett in a lot of ways on the weight issue. I don’t think sexiness or confidence comes from being fit. As a bisexual woman, I am not solely attracted to women who are super fit or thin. BUT, I think what Hammer is getting at is this one truth: women have a MUCH easier time over-all getting sex. This is hard to deny.
A friend once said to me, if you were sitting at this bar, and a guy who looks like Johnny Depp were also sitting at this bar, you would still have an easier time getting sex.
I feel like this is not exactly PC to discuss, because it makes sweeping generalizations but there does seem to be some truth there that is juicy to unravel. Thoughts?
Also @ Lance, intriguing. I think I would call myself a natural, actually, but I know a lot of women who are not!! I thought my “natural-ness” came from the fact that I am a Meyers Briggs: ENFP: “The giver”…more to chew on I suppose.
@ Xakudo: I think this is an exercise maybe Scarlett and I should try, and report back on! And bringing the conversation back to gray consent, it is curious to be how much “victimization” plays in. Instead of virgin/whore, when we talk about gray rape in feminist circles there seems to be a dichotomy of victim/thirdwave sex positive slut. It’s hard to talk in these areas about owning responsibility for gray consent, as a woman, or as the person whose boundaries were trampled…I am still not sure what I think about it either, other than it is important to understand what you could have done differently, and process your own steps in the dance-gone-wrong as well as your partner’s. Thoughts?
@Rachel, I do think that a lot of this discussion of “grey rape” is coming from a place of overvaluing sex, which is at its most fundamental level essentially accepting the unnatural patriarchal judeo-christian value system around purity and virginity, a concept that has very little support from an evolutionary standpoint if modern hunter-gatherer societies are any indication.
@Lance I totally agree, my best relationship was with a woman with ridiculous game, you could call her a supernatural. While it is true that she was ridiculously good looking, she presented herself in a way that made her extremely approachable, to the point where it would get annoying walking down the street with her sometimes. She would have all kinds of people asking her out or more; her doctors, her bosses, senators; all very high value people. She also had RIDICULOUS lesbian game, could consistently pull 50% of HOT women she hit on for same night threesomes with me.
A woman embracing her femininity and having game is super sexy, I’m not denying that. Still, most men can’t really appreciate good game, keep in mind that Lance and I are in the top 1% of men, which is why I think that it is far less important for women to learn game as compared to just getting fit, dressing cute, and cultivating positivity in their personality. Not every girl can be a life-size barbie college valedictorian columbia PhD like my ex, but getting into that 18-22% body fat range will DRAMATICALLY improve the quantity and quality of suitors.
Still, if you do want to learn game, Arden Leigh’s blog is free, her coaching is expensive, and her book is coming out in a few months, so that’s where I’d go with that.
@Hammer, you said: “Cultivating a natural sense of confidence is all good and well, but has absolutely no value in terms of a woman picking up guys.”
I disagree; I frequented a local “social group” a few years ago, and it was a really fascinating study of human dynamics. It didn’t matter how attractive a woman was; if she played the part of the wallflower, or her body language belied issues with self-confidence, she was never approached. On the other hand, my friend Sandra was “chubby” and not supremely attractive, but was so confident, outgoing, approachable and friendly that she owned the room. Her husband would joke later about how many numbers she turned down at these meet-ups.
We all have our own perspectives; if you strictly go only for the most physically fit and beautiful women, you probably either observe or assume that they have a ton of suitors. I’ve always been drawn to more unique and interesting looking people, as Rachel has mentioned, so maybe we’re more apt to notice and appreciate confidence and charm.
@Hammer – I too agree with great male/female relationships arising when they each have game and understand those dynamics. Most of my close male friends have natural PUA tendencies whether they know/use them or not. I get supremely frustrated with people who have low self-esteem and are anti-seductive – throwing themselves pity parties, always playing up the emo on Twitter and Facebook, who enjoy being the victim – but cultivating positive personality traits is not always easy, for men or women. If you go forward with a male/female joint PUA methodology, Lance, I think that would be really fascinating!
@Scarlett It shouldn’t be that surprising that less attractive women would have more guys getting her number, the more attractive the woman, the more difficult she is to approach. Likewise, the more gregarious the woman, the easier she is to approach. That doesn’t mean that she doesn’t have more guys hitting on her, just that less of them make it to the point where they would even consider getting her number. We are welcome to continue to believe that the there isn’t an exponential relationship between attractiveness and the number of options a woman has, but in reality…
This is really good advice. Agreed, “PUA tactics” should always be used in an ethical way ie. to develop oneself to be a more charming, interesting and desirable person.
Bear in mind that women are much more capable of mind games then men are, so in a way this is our attempt at levelling the playing field. An example to mind, a few months ago a girl went home with me from the bar and as we started messing around in bed, she said “I don’t want to have sex”. So I asked her “what do you want?”. “I want to sleep”. To that I replied “Ok, I don’t want you to do anything you don’t want to do. So you should leave.” She left in a huff.
In my eyes, I respected her right to not have sex. But she seemed compelled to play games.
One Trackback
[...] habe ich mit Pick Up Artists zu tun, was die Kommentare zu dem Artikel angeht, in dem ich sie kritisiere. Es geht um eine Männercommunity, deren Ziel es ist, Frauen zu verführen [...]