PUAs in Dublin

Wibbs

Puddleduck wrote: »

Well I dont think there are seminars for women on how to shag men. I may be wrong though. A lot of these self help crap aimed at women is how to get a fufilling realationship etc.

Which involves shagging. It's a different approach by the genders for the most part.

Also, a woman is either attracted to you for you or she isnt, doing PUA or talking about it till your blue in the face dosent change that.

I wouldn't agree. Yes you just may not be her type from across the room. OK, but you can seriously make her more attracted to you. Trust me as an ex brat in my youth;) I can vouch for that. I've had women that have told me they couldn't stand me/wasn't their type/I'm in love with another/the tide wouldn't take you out/etc and I ended up with them, whether for a night or for years. I would say the biggest obstacle is indifference actually. If you're noticed you have a chance.

scanlas

Puddleduck wrote: »

Well I dont think there are seminars for women on how to shag men. I may be wrong though. A lot of these self help crap aimed at women is how to get a fufilling realationship etc. Also, a woman is either attracted to you for you or she isnt, doing PUA or talking about it till your blue in the face dosent change that.

Some of these "pick up" companies have programmes for women too, although there not as focused on getting a shag, also some of them employ female instructors as well as male.

As for a woman is either attracted to you or she isn't. That's what I used to think too, until I found out differently from first hand experience. A woman might not be attracted to man's appearance initially, but an attractive personality soon changes that. How many times have you heard woman say "there's something about him but I don't know what it is", that's usually a reaction caused by a man with an attractive personality.

Puddleduck

I understand a bit better I suppose. I still dont like it as I think its exploiting those that are shy etc. I will also never be one for the whole one night stands or shagging everything around you, thats just not me, but I realise its for other people.

Perhaps Im of the belief that some of the men going are going to learn how to have a lot of sex and I feel that that belittles women somehow. As if he comes over putting the charms he learnt from Mr Smooth and bags the girl, thinks, this is great, rinse and repeat. And a whole load of women are left going 'Wtf? He seemed like a nice guy'. It just seems decieving, as if theres a whole load of blokes being shown how to be someone whos lovely in order to get a shag.

I dunno, perhaps I cant see the regular folk from atop my high horse

scanlas

You seem to be under the impression women never want one night stands.

There is nothing wrong with a man having sex with lots of women so long as he doesn't lie to them and give them the impression he wants more, and that doesn't mean he can't be nice. Nice guys like sex too.

Alot of people seem to have the mindset that when a man chats up a woman it's "man versus woman". That mindset isn't very helpful for the man or the woman. The best mindset to have is you are both on the same team enjoying each others company.

Wibbs

Puddleduck wrote: »

It just seems decieving, as if theres a whole load of blokes being shown how to be someone whos lovely in order to get a shag.

Ok I can see that, but look at it this way. Is makeup deceiving? Is a push up bra? Is getting your hair done? Are high heels if you've stumpy legs? Is a corset? Waxing your legs? Is a get up that accentuates your good points and covers up your bad? I mean they're all "deceptions" of a sort. Designed specifically to make you as an attractive a woman as possible to the world, to your peers and to men. Yes you can say you do it for yourself, but that doesn't quite ring true. Yes it does make you feel better, but it makes you feel better, because it makes you look more sexually attractive and that's valued as part of society. It will also get you noticed by the guy you want to have long term connection and sex with. Why can't men do the same?

I dunno, perhaps I cant see the regular folk from atop my high horse

Puddleduck

Wibbs wrote: »

Ok I can see that, but look at it this way. Is makeup deceiving? Is a push up bra? Is getting your hair done? Are high heels if you've stumpy legs? Is a corset? Waxing your legs? Is a get up that accentuates your good points and covers up your bad? I mean they're all "deceptions" of a sort. Designed specifically to make you as an attractive a woman as possible to the world, to your peers and to men. Yes you can say you do it for yourself, but that doesn't quite ring true. Yes it does make you feel better, but it makes you feel better, because it makes you look more sexually attractive and that's valued as part of society. It will also get you noticed by the guy you want to have long term connection and sex with. Why can't men do the same?

Well because its much easier for a guy or I suppose for a girl, but lets stick to men here, to pretend to be something he isnt. A girl can put on some slap and some nice clothes but if shes dog ugly shes dog ugly. End of, there is no hiding that. At least if you go for this girl you have a clue of what your going for rather than shagging mr nice guy only to wake up with someone else.

Maybe Ill set up a group specifically for women, although Im not sure how Id get past the bitching and competitiveness

ShooterSF

Puddleduck wrote: »

I understand a bit better I suppose. I still dont like it as I think its exploiting those that are shy etc. I will also never be one for the whole one night stands or shagging everything around you, thats just not me, but I realise its for other people.

Perhaps Im of the belief that some of the men going are going to learn how to have a lot of sex and I feel that that belittles women somehow. As if he comes over putting the charms he learnt from Mr Smooth and bags the girl, thinks, this is great, rinse and repeat. And a whole load of women are left going 'Wtf? He seemed like a nice guy'. It just seems decieving, as if theres a whole load of blokes being shown how to be someone whos lovely in order to get a shag.

I dunno, perhaps I cant see the regular folk from atop my high horse

Cool. I will say one last thing on the expoitation. There are people out there that will take advantage of you and are only interested in your cash and not your success. But they are in every walk of life and are not the majority in this issue or elsewhere. If a guy asks a question in one of these forums other guys genuinely try and help him out. So one day he can help them where they are having problems. It is actually in general a very close community.
I am glad you mentioned the other point. I respect that most women and most men do not share the same goal when it comes to interaction. If women said I don't like it cause it teaches a guy who wants one night stands how to get them and I dont like one night stands, fair enough! Hell ask a guy what his honest opinion of books like the rules and such is and he would tell you he doesnt like it cause it helps a women get commitments from guys who are after sex.
Thats nature

allabouteve

Wibbs wrote: »

Ok I can see that, but look at it this way. Is makeup deceiving? Is a push up bra? Is getting your hair done? Are high heels if you've stumpy legs? Is a corset? Waxing your legs? Is a get up that accentuates your good points and covers up your bad? I mean they're all "deceptions" of a sort.

True, but these deceptions relate to what one looks like, not who one actually is, a deception the PUA thing fosters.

consultech

Puddleduck wrote: »

And a whole load of women are left going 'Wtf? He seemed like a nice guy'. It just seems decieving, as if theres a whole load of blokes being shown how to be someone whos lovely in order to get a shag.

How is this "short-changing" (if you will) any different to how women lead men on with the way they dress/behave, when they have no intention of shagging them?

scanlas

allabouteve wrote: »

True, but these deceptions relate to what one looks like, not who one actually is, a deception the PUA thing fosters.

Once again someone is assuming that in order to get a women into bed you have to decieve her and hence puas must be decieving women. Not true, women are often the ones initiating sex when interacting with good puas and non puas who are good with women.

Maybe it's movies that has people thinking you have to trick a woman to sleep with you.

Puddleduck

consultech wrote: »

How is this "short-changing" (if you will) any different to how women lead men on with the way they dress/behave, when they have no intention of shagging them?

Thats flirting. Flirting dosent equal sex in my books.

Unless shes actually said 'Lets have sex' then I dont think men should think they have closed the deal.

allabouteve

consultech wrote: »

How is this "short-changing" (if you will) any different to how women lead men on with the way they dress/behave, when they have no intention of shagging them?

Leading men on by dressing a certain way? Oh, right. If I wear a low cut top, its not because I look good it it for its own sake, its so I can lead men on. Right.

There should be a blanket ban on dressing sexy if shags are unforthcoming.

I suppose smiling is shagbeggery too.:)

Wibbs

Puddleduck wrote: »

Well because its much easier for a guy

Yes and no. he gets less competition from fellow men socially and he has less fashion problems alright, but it's a sellers market and women are doing the selling for the most part.

or I suppose for a girl, but lets stick to men here, to pretend to be something he isnt.

OK

A girl can put on some slap and some nice clothes but if shes dog ugly shes dog ugly. End of, there is no hiding that.

I wouldn't quite agree. Yes if she's some horrendous munter, then slap will only cover up so much, but, what it does is increase whatever attraction she's got already. It won't turn a munter into a beautiful, but it'll make her look better and it'll turn a lot of plain women into more beautiful women.

At least if you go for this girl you have a clue of what your going for rather than shagging mr nice guy only to wake up with someone else.

Not so much. I went out with a lassie a few years back. very glam all the time. Naked she had a flat chest, short legs and without makeup had tiny little beady eyes. Fair enough I thought she was still cute enough and she was nice enough too, but her public outward appearance was quite different to her natural appearance. One reason I prefer women who wear little or no makeup.

All I'm saying is self improvement for men can be seen as makeup for the soul, though if done correctly it's more akin to a flabby stodgy women hitting the gym for two years and coming out of it like a fitness model.

Maybe Ill set up a group specifically for women, although Im not sure how Id get past the bitching and competitiveness

:eek::D Oh you're in trouble now.

ShooterSF

allabouteve wrote: »

True, but these deceptions relate to what one looks like, not who one actually is, a deception the PUA thing fosters.

Please, please super please read the last few pages then fire off questions?! Please?

Wibbs

allabouteve wrote: »

Leading men on by dressing a certain way? Oh, right. If I wear a low cut top, its not because I look good it it for its own sake, its so I can lead men on. Right.

Yes that's a step too far, but maybe that's not what he was getting at. I would say you wear a low cut top because it accentuates your physical assets and as such makes you look more attractive to all including yourself. It is a sexual signal. Female breasts are secondary sexual characteristics. In our society they are even more so, Wearing a low cut top signals this. If it didn't you would wear a tracksuit to a niteclub for comfort. But just because it's a sexual signal it does not mean it's a sexual signal for all and sundry or an expression of your need for a shag.

I suppose smiling is shagbeggery too.:)

Only if accompanied by "how you doin?"

K-9

allabouteve wrote: »

True, but these deceptions relate to what one looks like, not who one actually is, a deception the PUA thing fosters.

I wouldn't agree. If they help you to be more confident and assured it's the same thing.

I think the reason some women don't understand it is they don't usually do the chatting up!

allabouteve

Wibbs wrote: »

I would say you wear a low cut top because it accentuates your physical assets and as such makes you look more attractive to all including yourself. It is a sexual signal. Female breasts are secondary sexual characteristics. In our society they are even more so, Wearing a low cut top signals this. If it didn't you would wear a tracksuit to a niteclub for comfort. "

Right, thats why hen parties only wear tracksuits. Even in an all female environment.

I take your point, but social conditioning tempers the purely animalistic interpretation you have for all interactions between the sexes, especially amongst slightly older individuals. You need to spend less time in the gorilla house at the zoo, mate!:)

scanlas

allabouteve wrote: »

Right, thats why hen parties only wear tracksuits. Even in an all female environment.

I take your point, but social conditioning tempers the purely animalistic interpretation you have for all interactions between the sexes, especially amongst slightly older individuals. You need to spend less time in the gorilla house at the zoo, mate!:)

There's competition between women to look more attractive, also hen parties staying completely out of sight of men have to be rare, maybe I'm wrong.

JC 2K3

allabouteve wrote: »

True, but these deceptions relate to what one looks like, not who one actually is, a deception the PUA thing fosters.

There's a HUGE difference between who one actually is, and the way they present themselves to and interact with others.

If I'm bad at public speaking and I take a course in it to become better at it, I'm not changing who I am, I'm simply becoming better at public speaking.

If I'm bad at talking to strangers in social situations and I become better at this by reading a book and applying advice, I'm not changing who I am, I'm just becoming better at interacting with people.

If I'm bad at appearing attractive to girls and I read some advice on a PUA site, I'm not changing who I am, I'm just becoming better at appearing attractive to girls.

Wibbs

allabouteve wrote: »

Right, thats why hen parties only wear tracksuits. Even in an all female environment.

what scanlas said. It's just an extension of social bonding and competition in another public environment.

I take your point, but social conditioning tempers the purely animalistic interpretation you have for all interactions between the sexes, especially amongst slightly older individuals.

Where dos social conditioning come from in the first place? Us. The animals. It guides and tempers or accentuates the animalistic, but it's still there. Breasts are a good example. Breasts are secondary sexual characteristics. Simple as. Now in the amazon jungle women have their boobs out all the time so while they're still considered attractive in a mate, they're not as objectified. In Islamic states they're entirely covered up, but still are considered sexually attractive in a mate. In the west, they're less covered up and are more objectified, but again they are considered a sexually attractive asset in a mate. Different social conditioning, the same underlying animalistic interpretation.

You need to spend less time in the gorilla house at the zoo, mate!:)

Naw I was in coppers at the weekend.:D

People think they have more control over their "baser" instincts than they actually do and they're more predictable than they would like to think.

honru

allabouteve wrote: »

True, but these deceptions relate to what one looks like, not who one actually is, a deception the PUA thing fosters.

But the appearance a woman achieves will greatly determine her persona. When all the cosmetic work is done, she will feel the same amount of confidence in the club as the guy who has that perfect routine. Cosmetics and pick up material act as contingencies that help get the ball rolling for both sexes.

Saying that, both an attractive physical appearance and a scripted story are not who someone truly is.

stevelknievel

Puddleduck wrote: »

Perhaps Im of the belief that some of the men going are going to learn how to have a lot of sex and I feel that that belittles women somehow. As if he comes over putting the charms he learnt from Mr Smooth and bags the girl, thinks, this is great, rinse and repeat. And a whole load of women are left going 'Wtf? He seemed like a nice guy'. It just seems decieving, as if theres a whole load of blokes being shown how to be someone whos lovely in order to get a shag.

First point here is that yes people are learning how to have more sex. But why is that a bad thing? For men or women? Some guys take this and use it to have lots of sex with the woman for a couple of years. Some use it for regular random encounters. The community doesn't encourage you to shag as many women as you can. It gives you the tools and knowledge. What you do with that is entirely up to the individual. Women have been waking up thinking WTF for years. Pua has nothing to do with that. Someone used the analogy of the hammer earlier on. It's meant as a tool but can be used as a weapon. Personally I have used the community to increase my confidence, my social sense, and my ability to talk. I used to be that quiet guy who hangs around the table and doesn't say anything on a night out. And this was a group of co-workers, not beautiful women. I couldn't ask people for directions, or the time. I was a disaster. I have completely changed now. I will talk to anyone who will listen. My body language is much better. I'm having more fun and people in my company are having more fun. And I have not had cheated or deceived a woman into bed for a one night since. Because I wasn't that type of guy before and I'm still not now. What's wrong with that?

Puddleduck

Puddleduck wrote: »

Why dont you just approach women and talk rather than keeping a diary of conquests and failures.

Tbh I find the whole idea creepy, and thats not because Im jealous that men are now apparently moving into the whole wimminz manipulating the men crap. Thats just because people shouldnt need a manual or seminar on how to approach women, if anything they should work on improving their self confidence in approaching people in general.

Maybe the only way to get through to you would be to give you some personal information. I'm very tall and very skinny, due to a high metabolism. I also have a shaking disorder which causes my hands to shake in a very apparent way. The rest of my body throws off little tremors all the time. As I've got older these have become less obvious but they're always there. Now when I was a teenager, I would try to talk to women in any setting, and the first thing they'd usually ask was why I was shaking. They would, of course, have their own opinions on why... Do you have any idea what that does to a young man's self-confidence?

The thing is that approaching a girl or woman can be a terrifying experience. You don't know how they're going to react. Some are nice, and respond in a nice manner. Some are distant, and drift away. And some are outright nasty, and will seek to cause you pain simply because you happen to be there. Often times it was the girls in groups which were the worst since they would seek to best each other in how nasty they could possibly be. Its very easy to withdraw into yourself rather than face this sort of treatment every time you went out.

And with this background I entered college (early 90's), and found that this sort of crap continued. And so i felt that I needed help. Which I found through these books, tapes, and seminars.

You are a woman. The basic fact is that you don't have to approach guys. You may have done it a few times, but imagine doing so at least 5 times a week (say one night a week going out) for five years... or more. Its sometimes very hard, and yet its the only way anything is going to happen. So, finding help from this PUA setup or the Speed Seduction can be the only real alternative to roasting your nuts over a fire every night you go out.

Is that more clear?

Wibbs

Fair play for posting that, regardless of anyones opinion either way.

K-9

Wibbs wrote: »

Fair play for posting that, regardless of anyones opinion either way.

Also shows that it can actually have a very good effect on a persons life.

K-9

I think there is a common misconception when it comes to meeting new people. That its easy and straightforward. So if you find it easy, then everyone else must find it easy also. If you have been lucky to have many friends, then everyone else has had the same experience. Unfortunately that's not the case. Everyone has to experience these things for themselves, and face different sets of challenges.. I details the basics of my own reasons for studying speed seduction, but its still only the basic background.

K-9 wrote:

Also shows that it can actually have a very good effect on a persons life.

It had a huge impact on my life. Suddenly I joined a community of men (and some women) who had problems with meeting people just like I did. I'm not even going to restrict it to just girls. But forming relationships with people. I always had problems understanding why certain things were acceptable in society, and I didn't live my life the way most other young men I knew. ( I hate sport, don't particularly like getting drunk, and gossiping about people never appealed to me) And with joining this community, I had literally hundreds of people willing to help me with advice and even to actually be there to help.

That cant be underestimated. I was pretty much a loner, and all of a sudden I had a support base of people all happy to help me. And the wonderful thing about the Speed Seduction scene is that its all so positive. There was nothing negative about it, except for the different "masters" issues with each other. Ross Jeffries has a massive ego.

I went to three speed seduction seminars. So far there have been a number of posts against these seminars, but I can tell you that it is there that I experienced the most beneficial changes to my life. I learned how to use self-hypnosis to break down phobias (I lost a major Fear of Heights, and I'm no longer Claustrophobic in Elevators), I learned a number of Meditation techniques which i use to this day to combat stress or anxiety, I learned the basics of NLP which I use both in my work and also to have a better relationship with my parents.

Its very easy to look at the PUA or Speed Seduction scene and throw in some flippant remark. Personally I think many people are unwilling or incapable of looking inside themselves and really trying to understand why they live their lives the way they do. The PUA scene or Speed Seduction scene is a great first step to finding the tools to do just that.

Now I am 31 years old (32 in march, lol), and I don't need that scene anymore. In fact I haven't needed it in quite a few years. Life is pretty good, and continues to get better every day.

Wibbs

Deleted User wrote: »

Personally I think many people are unwilling or incapable of looking inside themselves and really trying to understand why they live their lives the way they do

Many? You're being way too kind. I would say most can't or won't. That's been my experience. They look on the world and gauge how others look on the world, entirely focused through the lens of their own makeup and rarely consider unless forced to look beyond that. Given most people have baggage they don't even realise and some have more baggage than aer rianta on xmas eve, no wonder so many live in a perpetual state of low level fear. It's so natural to them they don't even notice. Don't believe me? Ask someone to relax. I mean really relax and let themselves go. Most if not the majority can't. They've lost the feeling of what it is to relax. Scary and very upsetting to watch sometimes. It affects their lives and the choces they make in those lives in so many ways.

honru

Wibbs wrote:

Many? You're being way too kind. I would say most can't or won't. That's been my experience. They look on the world and gauge how others look on the world, entirely focused through the lens of their own makeup and rarely consider unless forced to look beyond that.

Very true Wibbs, I've had to come to terms with many aspects of myself that I would repress or not acknowledge. Much of our society would rather take the position of superiority or seek character weaknesses in others before taking a look at themselves. And ironically, the behavior you judge in others is often a reflection of the same behavior in yourself.

johnathan woss

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wibbs
Many? You're being way too kind. I would say most can't or won't. That's been my experience. They look on the world and gauge how others look on the world, entirely focused through the lens of their own makeup and rarely consider unless forced to look beyond that.

f®eak s©enery wrote: »

Very true Wibbs, I've had to come to terms with many aspects of myself that I would repress or not acknowledge. Much of our society would rather take the position of superiority or seek character weaknesses in others before taking a look at themselves. And ironically, the behavior you judge in others is often a reflection of the same behavior in yourself.

Oh the irony :pac:

NickNolte

My problem with all this PUA stuff is that it makes the primary (and incorrect) assumption that women hate men and that men have to act cavalier as a result. It's very unhealthy. If adopted wholesale as the norm, it will make for a very unhealthy society full of complete arseholes.