Seduction School Seminar & Bootcamp!

Ickle Magoo

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Maybe you are wearing them wrong :P

There is only one way to wear a micro-mini - and that is very carefully....being of ample cleavage (and I'll gtfo before offering pics) I have never needed to wear a push up. :P

Micky Dolenz

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

There is only one way to wear a micro-mini - and that is very carefully....being of ample cleavage (and I'll gtfo before offering pics) I have never needed to wear a push up. :P

:eek: you need say no more. Imagination gone into overdrive. nice work :pac:

AnnyHallsal

I find the PUA thing repulsive. I like kind men and was always attracted to the shy fellas who wouldn't dream of approaching a girl, and stood at the corner of the dancefloor with their hair in their eyes. So I used to approach them instead.

In terms of the attention women receive, so much of it is unpleasant - pinching bottoms, grabbing, drunken slurring. And it turns nasty so quickly. I ignored most of that because it was so rarely genuine and so difficult to extricate yourself from if you weren't interested. My OH was one of those hopeless types and I love him all the more for that.

I saw some of that TV show by the guru "Mystery" and it depressed me enormously. The guy himself is such a twat and to think of people spreading that odious nonsense making the world a less pleasant place .. To any guy considering it, I would say if you want to be a playa, I have no time for you. If you're trying to exploit people's weaknesses to get laid maybe you should think about trying to be a better man. And to guys who are just shy, I say shyness is great (Morrissey in my head )

I guess the female equivalent was "The Rules," though I don't think that ever caught on in any significant way.

HavingCrack

Look, there's a lot of people on this thread saying just "be yourself" and "just talk to a girl you like". I know and you know thats utter bull****. I know lads who are horribly shy and just going up and chatting to a pretty girl in a coffee shop would be up there with having to walk down O'Connell Street naked in the middle of the day if not worse.

I agree some of the PUA stuff is slightly odd and some of the dakrer side of it is erring towards the truly sinister (seriously depressed men chatting up women to hide from their own mental problems but anyway). However, if it helps some seriously shy men meet more women I don't think its that bad.

As far as I can see you can break it down into a few simple rules.

1-Be as confident as you can (building up confidence is the main problem for most men).
2-Become immune to rejection, thats what all the appraoching tonnes of girls is for, you eventually stop caring.
3-Feel good about yourself, if you don't like you why will women liek you either.
4-Its a numbers game. Clearly them man who goes up to 20 women in a week has a better chance than the guy who only approaches one.
5-Women are only humans too . They're no better and no worse than you.

In an Irish context I think I should include a sixth rule. Don't use alcohol as a crutch. If you're afraid to talk to a girl unless you have six pints in you you've got a bigger problem than not being able to chat to women.

Links234 wrote: »

this pick up artist stuff is REALLY creepy,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0UCLnt1RCY

To be honest, that video is not that bad. He approaches women in the street and starts talking to them about astronomy. Gets rejected a lot and eventually gets a girls number. Basically he just uses the book as a talking point and just plays the numbers game. That's all that PUA is to be honest, just a numbers game.

Dudess

OutlawPete wrote: »

It doesn't have to be as it will get them the desired effect.

But it has to be the intent for it to be manipulative. You said some women can manipulate with their bodies in the same way that guys who subscribe to PUA tactics are being manipulative (I found that pretty appallling - please don't attack me for saying that, I can't help it if I found it appalling) however it is the intent for those guys to be manipulative, it is not necessarily the intent by women who dress sexily (which might be simply them looking their best) to be manipulative. Feeling manipulated is often up to the guy himself.

It makes men look at them in a sexual way and that is what they want.

Maybe it is because it's flattering rather than a form of undermining that man?

My point about staying at home and not dressing that way is that, if those clothes just made women feel good about themselves, they would wear them at home on their own.

Yes I know what your point is, and women do dress sexily to feel good about themselves... but yes, in public, because part of what makes them feel good about themselves is the positive attention they get.

As far as I am concerned, that too is manipulating guys minds so that they will look at them and want what they have.

As far as you're concerned indeed (cue: attack). A girl does not necessarily get dressed sexily to go out and manipulate a man the way a guy using PUA techniques does to manipulate woman. Intent is what it all boils down to here.

You're talking about just nice clothes again, I am not.

No, I am talking also about looking sexy - please don't tell me what I'm talking about. You read into dressing sexily (and that does not necessarily mean wearing skimpy clothes) as having an agenda, I see it as wanting to look good - yes, sexy; yes, desirable - that is human nature.
Unless a girl is actually behaving in an obnoxious manipulative underhand manner towards men, it is up to the guy himself to feel manipulated by what she is wearing.

AnnyHallsal

Dudess wrote: »

But it has to be the intent for it to be manipulative. You said some women can manipulate with their bodies in the same way that guys who subscribe to PUA tactics are being manipulative (I found that pretty appallling - please don't attack me for saying that, I can't help it if I found it appalling) however it is the intent for those guys to be manipulative, it is not necessarily the intent by women who dress sexily (which might be simply them looking their best) to be manipulative. Feeling manipulated is often up to the guy himself.

Maybe it is because it's flattering rather than a form of undermining that man?

Yes I know what your point is, and women do dress sexily to feel good about themselves... but yes, in public, because part of what makes them feel good about themselves is the positive attention they get.

As far as you're concerned indeed (cue: attack). A girl does not necessarily get dressed sexily to go out and manipulate a man the way a guy using PUA techniques does to manipulate woman. Intent is what it all boils down to here.

No, I am talking also about looking sexy - please don't tell me what I'm talking about. You read into dressing sexily (and that does not necessarily mean wearing skimpy clothes) as having an agenda, I see it as wanting to look good - yes, sexy; yes, desirable - that is human nature.
Unless a girl is actually behaving in an obnoxious manipulative underhand manner towards men, it is up to the guy himself to feel manipulated by what she is wearing.

I agree. It's down to intent. A lot of the time women are unintentionally sexy. A lot of guys find skinny jeans and a plain top sexy, or Avril Lavigne gothy slacker .. or ordinary office attire. The "Mystery" thing is basically to trick a girl into sleeping with you by preying on her vulnerability. That isn't the same as inspiring lust, intentionally or otherwise.

Wibbs

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Personally i just get tired of the concept that a good looking woman can manipulate any man she likes....only if the guy in question is a ****ing chump tbh.

True LF, but there are an awful lot of "chumps" out there. I've been surprised how many men fall for this idea that good looking is so rare that they have to be or act like bloody morons to get "it". Whether that be PUA BS or being slavish to someone just because of that with little regard to anything else.

Hell there are enough women "chumps" too, who put up with inordinate crap just to get or keep some guy, because they may feel to lose him is worse. Chumpery* has no gender bias. Hence some guys plug into the PUA thing and some women plug into the "rules" thing too. Actually IMHO PUA has slightly more basis in reality. At least the obvious is obvious stuff.

I reckon Lux23 has a good point, it seems many men need some guidance. Good guidance. And what do they get? Either the daft, but well intentioned "just be yourself". Which means nada as if being yourself worked they'd not have an issue and maybe their "selves" need a workout in the soul gym? Or they get the PUA guff.

With regards to the seminar itself, a fool and his money are easily parted.

QFT. Though I do reckon they'll fill their places.




*needs to be a word.

RedXIV

Dudess wrote: »

But it has to be the intent for it to be manipulative. You said some women can manipulate with their bodies in the same way that guys who subscribe to PUA tactics are being manipulative (I found that pretty appallling - please don't attack me for saying that, I can't help it if I found it appalling) however it is the intent for those guys to be manipulative, it is not necessarily the intent by women who dress sexily (which might be simply them looking their best) to be manipulative. Feeling manipulated is often up to the guy himself.

Maybe it is because it's flattering rather than a form of undermining that man?

Yes I know what your point is, and women do dress sexily to feel good about themselves... but yes, in public, because part of what makes them feel good about themselves is the positive attention they get.

As far as you're concerned indeed (cue: attack). A girl does not necessarily get dressed sexily to go out and manipulate a man the way a guy using PUA techniques does to manipulate woman. Intent is what it all boils down to here.

No, I am talking also about looking sexy - please don't tell me what I'm talking about. You read into dressing sexily (and that does not necessarily mean wearing skimpy clothes) as having an agenda, I see it as wanting to look good - yes, sexy; yes, desirable - that is human nature.
Unless a girl is actually behaving in an obnoxious manipulative underhand manner towards men, it is up to the guy himself to feel manipulated by what she is wearing.

With Respect ( ) I think it's important to note that anyone who is trying to present the positive aspects that can be gleaned from these practices is more than happy to agree that the extreme versions are ridiculous. I think the guys that try to memorize lines to fit each situation are not getting it right, and the guys that are just trying to get laid are not desirable people.

However, the people who take this material to try and better themselves and to make themselves more confident in social situations is definitely something that can shown as a parallel with girls doing themselves up for a night out. Most of these guys and girls have no intentions of manipulating people but they are prepared to present themselves in the most attractive light they are capable of.

I mentioned this before that all this PUA stuff, it won't change a nice guy into a scumbag, and similarly, it's not going to turn a scumbag into a gentleman. All this is going to do is provide people with the tools to be more proficient in social situations. And in fairness, with some of the crap I've heard on nights out, we do kinda need it

PeakOutput

i know its after hours and boards in general but the amount of ignorance in this thread is laughable

there are detailed explanations of your criticisms in the first few pages of the thread but you just keep harping on about negs like you know what your talking about

im sure plenty of people read the game and think they now know how to be a pick up artist and then goes out insults a bunch of women and gets the low self esteem one and thinks bang iv discovered the secret. this is not what its meant to be for and its not its intention so just like you shouldnt blame karate if i go to a few lessons and then break some guys nose on the street you shouldnt bame the game for a guys reading it and going out and being dicks. they would probably be dicks either way

also negging is what gets the most attention out of the entire process when it is meant to be one tiny part of a much bigger picture.

basic picture

1.build up the confidence to approach
2.approach in a way that makes you stand out from the previous thousand guys that did it
3. disqualify yourself(neg)
4. build attraction by telling interesting stories / being funny / paying attention to and entertaining all her friends
5.test to see if she is interested
6.if not build more attraction / if so try and move to a different location or get her on her own
7.go for the number / kiss / take her home
8. be given number / kiss / ride or not

thats it, its a set of steps for guys who think women are from a different planet and need to be able to logically think things threw in order for them to believe it can work.

most guys will try it and fail miserably like most people do when they try anything

some guys will try it and it will build their confidence quickly by helping them realise that there are girls out there who wont scream in his face just for saying hi

some guys will try it , get ok at it and like it and keep going and look into more of the theory and psychology

some of these guys will become the so called pick up artists

i dont see one problematic thing in any of the above if you do youa re reading way way too much into it and to mention it in the same sentence as domestic abuse is an insult to anyone who has suffered domestic abuse imho

mikom

Here, let me save you hundreds of Euro in Seduction School fees.

Some girls will, some girls won't
Some girls need a lot of lovin' and some girls don't
Well, I know I've got the fever but I don't know why
Some say they will and some girls lie

So here I am in front of you
Not really knowing what to do
My heart is feeling something new
Nervously I turn away from you
I see the looks you're sending me
Is this the way it's meant to be?
It's something we should talk about
Just give me time to work it out

Some girls will, some girls won't
Some girls need a lot of lovin' and some girls don't
Well, I know I've got the fever but I don't know why
Some say they will and some girls lie

I find your company to be
Something completely new to me
Now that I know you socially
Obviously I'll fall heavily
I've seen those looks you're sending me
This is the way it's meant to be
There's nothing left to talk about
Oh, how I wish you'd work it out

Some girls will, some girls won't
Some girls need a lot of lovin' and some girls don't
Well, I know I've got the fever but I don't know why
Some say they will and some girls lie

fungun

meh, its all about the patter. If you can talk bull**** naturally you'll be fine. If not and you are very shy, I can see how this helps...its kinda like false confidence. Dont think any more of it.

In general in a bar/club scenario where people are looking to pull:

Women know men like boobs/bodies so dress to make themselves appear nicer.
Men know women like men with confidence (often referred to as 'assholes') so act to appear that way.

Its all fair game. But you get what you pay for.

Wibbs

PeakOutput wrote: »

i know its after hours and boards in general but the amount of ignorance in this thread is laughable

there are detailed explanations of your criticisms in the first few pages of the thread but you just keep harping on about negs like you know what your talking about

I would tend to agree and I've read a fair bit on the subject, mostly because at one stage like Thaedydal said earlier we were getting it a lot in PI as a solution to all things dating. Know your enemy kinda thing Some of it was interesting and certainly in the American culture it seemed to work, albeit in a very narrow environment and with a particular age range. A lot of it seemed to be cod psychology around various bits of social proof. Much of it obvious. What was also obvious is the majority of "gurus" were attractive men to start with. The overweight guy with the "interesting" tee shirt and bottle end glasses was not exactly well represented.

IMHO the negging thing is actually one of the least dodgy aspects even among the most dubious practitioners. I think people are latching on to it too much and like PO says getting a lot of it wrong. Think of it more like easy banter of the "ah would you go away outa that" with a laugh attached. Stuff that a lot of socially immature men just dont get. I would reckon that a lot of the discomfort is the idea that they themselves may be duped by this, or that their buttons are considered so easily pushed. Often while they may push others buttons in a different way. The "women lie in how they dress and accentuate their attractiveness" V "why can't men do same". I dont think that's helpful and it plugs into this current bollocks of them and us/gender war shíte. Not helpful at all and yes I would agree PUA stuff accentuates this.

this is not what its meant to be for and its not its intention so just like you shouldnt blame karate if i go to a few lessons and then break some guys nose on the street you shouldnt bame the game for a guys reading it and going out and being dicks. they would probably be dicks either way

Good analogy. The diffs I would suggest are that a lunkhead who takes up martial arts for the sole purposes of bashing people up won't last jig time in the majority of dojos. Plus they dont seek to practice their art on "civilians". Plus the systems they learn are many generations old and have evolved in very sophisticated ways. If the PUA thing was more ordered and took in all aspects of acheiving social maturity and maturity full stop in the participants then I'd be all for it. IMHO it's not. Now if someone dips into it for pointers and leaves it at that, then that's when you get success stories. Some of whom have been reported here. Its when vulnerable guys immerse further it doesnt get better it gets worse.

basic picture

1.build up the confidence to approach
2.approach in a way that makes you stand out from the previous thousand guys that did it
3. disqualify yourself(neg)
4. build attraction by telling interesting stories / being funny / paying attention to and entertaining all her friends
5.test to see if she is interested
6.if not build more attraction / if so try and move to a different location or get her on her own
7.go for the number / kiss / take her home
8. be given number / kiss / ride or not

From my take on it that's a good description and what most guys who find it easy to chat up women would do. Now I have a few issues with it, because of it's singlemindedness, but for guys who can barely say hello to a woman without blushing I can see the attraction. So caught between useless advice like "just be yourself" etc and dubious PUA guff that does seem to work on a superficial level, I'm not surprised many men support or feel defensive of it.

thats it, its a set of steps for guys who think women are from a different planet and need to be able to logically think things threw in order for them to believe it can work.

That's the demographic alright. That's where I start to have the problems with the system. Because it is of the step by step "system" approach, those kinda guys are more likely IMHO to become obsessed with it to the exclusion of all else. In seeking to grow they become more stunted and single tracked and they will have plenty of fellow travelers to gee them on and "gurus" happy to do so for their own gain. Oh sure they may "get" more women, but keeping them is an entirely different matter. Growing themselves an even bigger issue. I seem to recall one guru type was aiming at an all over soul makeover, but he seemed to be in the minority. Even then it was a very narrow and subjective to him notion of makeover.

i dont see one problematic thing in any of the above if you do youa re reading way way too much into it and to mention it in the same sentence as domestic abuse is an insult to anyone who has suffered domestic abuse imho

+1 that part is daft. Now you could stretch credulity and suggest the men attracted to this guff are the men who will be abusers, but I really do think that's pushing it and very simplistic.

Fungun wrote:

Women know men like boobs/bodies so dress to make themselves appear nicer.

I would somewhat agree, but it's a little simplistic. IMHO women dress to please themselves, to fit in with their women peers and then to make themselves attractive to men. Good example in extremis of this. Muslim Arab women. Covered from head to toe as part of their faith and the majority contrary to popular, happy to do so. They will meet among themselves and remove the covering to reveal very high fashion garments underneath. They go for body hair removal and beauty treatments in a big way too. All the major fashion houses sell big into such cultures, yet the only man who will ever see this stuff are their husbands. So removing men entirely from the equation they still do it.

Men know women like men with confidence (often referred to as 'assholes') so act to appear that way.

Yes but again simplistic. Like you say to the wallflower guy he may well call the non wall flower guy an "arsehole", but that's usually down to him projecting his issues externally. Plus he misses the point entirely of what is attractive about the confident man. Women too get confused by this. Hence the cliched bad boy phase when younger. They too mistake cocky arseholes for good men, because they do appear to have some of the character traits of the latter.

If some PUA guru comes along with a framework that will help build good well rounded, emotionally and socially mature men then I'd be all for it and I reckon so would the majority of women. I just dont think or have seen any so far even getting close to that.

Longest AH post evah! I've just wibbsed the thread havent I?

My name is URL

I guess there's nothing much wrong with trying to improve how you interact with women on a 1-to-1 basis.. things start to sound a little creepy and conceited when 'wingmen' and the likes are brought into the equation. If you need a third party to intervene and 'disarm' the group then I think it's safe to say that you should find a different target.

OutlawPete

My name is URL wrote: »

I guess there's nothing much wrong with trying to improve how you interact with women on a 1-to-1 basis.. things start to sound a little creepy and conceited when 'wingmen' and the likes are brought into the equation. If you need a third party to intervene and 'disarm' the group then I think it's safe to say that you should find a different target.

How about a 'wing-woman'?

As, last night I (again) had a girl thrown into me by her friends.

I wasn't interested in her but her friend thought that if she kept on pushing her into me, I'd suddenly think: 'Oh, a female woman type person is upon me, I must consume her at once' ..

Anyone else aware of the phenomena of girls shoving their friends into men?

I likes it, usually.

PeakOutput

OutlawPete wrote: »

Anyone else aware of the phenomena of girls shoving their friends into men?

yep, i find it usualy means the girl who is pushing her friend on you is actually the one who likes you

Ickle Magoo

OutlawPete wrote: »

How about a 'wing-woman'?

As, last night I (again) had a girl thrown into me by her friends.

I wasn't interested in her but her friend thought that if she kept on pushing her into me, I'd suddenly think: 'Oh, a female woman type person is upon me, I must consume her at once' ..

Anyone else aware of the phenomena of girls shoving their friends into men?

I likes it, usually.

But deliberately and obviously pushing her pal onto you isn't the same as how or why a wing-man operates in PUA is it? I still think you are trying desperately to conflate apples and oranges.

PeakOutput

Dudess wrote: »

But it has to be the intent for it to be manipulative.
<snip all the bull****>
Unless a girl is actually behaving in an obnoxious manipulative underhand manner towards men, it is up to the guy himself to feel manipulated by what she is wearing.

it has nothing to do with manipulation, no1 is being manipulated. no1 is being insulted, and no1 is being 'taken down a peg or two'. all that is happening is that the girl is given the chance to be interested in a particular guy. thats all

nlp - (neuro linquistic programming)
hypnotism
other darren brown type stuff

are all things taught by the way way shadier pick up community and are all manipulation and not part of the 'mainstream' pick up artist thing

if someone reads a book on leadership qualities and puts it in practice and ends up getting a promotion? have they manipulated their way to that promotion and is it unfair on the person who didnt read the book?

starlit

OutlawPete wrote: »

How about a 'wing-woman'?

As, last night I (again) had a girl thrown into me by her friends.

I wasn't interested in her but her friend thought that if she kept on pushing her into me, I'd suddenly think: 'Oh, a female woman type person is upon me, I must consume her at once' ..

Anyone else aware of the phenomena of girls shoving their friends into men?

I likes it, usually.

No I have not known of that phenomen at all! Never experienced that sort of thing other than the phenomen of friends talking their friend(s) into approaching the guy or getting her to be approached or basically the girl in question makes a little move like an elbow shove or something of her own accord of course. Why do you not like women being thrown at ya?:p

OutlawPete

Dudess wrote: »

But it has to be the intent for it to be manipulative.

There is intent, the intent to pull a guy by displaying what they know guys want.

The same way a fisherman manipulates the fact that fish like worms, but sticks it on a hook.

When girls dress sexually provocative, they know they are basically laying bait and that is manipulative.

Dudess wrote: »

You said some women can manipulate with their bodies in the same way that guys who subscribe to PUA tactics are being manipulative ..

I did.

Dudess wrote: »

(I found that pretty appallling - please don't attack me for saying that ..

Why would I attack you for that

As I have said, the vast majority of the PUA stuff that I have seen has been harmless.

Dudess wrote: »

.. however it is the intent for those guys to be manipulative, it is not necessarily the intent by women who dress sexily ..

Of course it is, girls that dress that way know precisley the effect they are having on guys, they are not stupid.

It is manipulative to put on display in such provocative ways, that which you know is wanted and desired by those around you, in order to get attention.

Their goal is then pick the cream of the crop for whichever 'catch' succumbs to the 'bait' ..

Dudess wrote: »

As far as you're concerned indeed (cue: attack).

Dudess, this is the second time in this post that you have implied that I am attacking you or, going to attack you .. could you please stop.

Dudess wrote: »

No, I am talking also about looking sexy - please don't tell me what I'm talking about. .

I am not trying to tell you what you are talking about, I was referring to your comment about "looking her best".

I am talking clothes that are obviously to worn to garner sexual attention, which is why I included the photo of Davina with boobs hanging out, that is far from 'just wanting to look her best'.

Dudess wrote: »

You read into dressing sexily (and that does not necessarily mean wearing skimpy clothes) as having an agenda, I see it as wanting to look good - yes, sexy; yes, desirable - that is human nature.

And again, I am saying there is a difference between "just wanting to look good" and dressing in a way that you know will have guys with their tongues hanging out.

The latter is to make guys want them sexually.

The majority of PUA stuff, is also just to make girls want them sexually.

starlit

Whats PUA?

There is dressing sexy in a classy and comfortable fashion and wearing it mysteriously and there is dressing sexy in a tarty way everything on show, tight skimpy not much hidden. There is a difference.

OutlawPete

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Perhaps my definition is out but I always thought manipulation was being cunning and underhand - I don't think a micro mini & push-up bra qualify.

Collins English Dictionary definition will do for me ..

.. to control something or someone cleverly or deviously ..

I think it very clever

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

I still think you are trying desperately to conflate apples and oranges.

I'm not trying to "conflate" anything, I am just chilling out on a Saturday and having a discussion.

Wingmen were brought up and so I brought up the closest that I have come to what could be considered a 'wing woman'.

snuggles285 wrote: »

..or basically the girl in question makes a little move like an elbow shove or something of her own accord of course.

Once seen a girl dance backwards into a mate of mine that caused him to pour Guinness all over himself.

snuggles285 wrote: »

Why do you not like women being thrown at ya?

Ah, I do .. just wasn't my type, still waiting for someone to chuck Kristen Stewart at me, she drinks in Whelan's, right?

OutlawPete

snuggles285 wrote: »

Whats PUA?

Pick Up Artist.

snuggles285 wrote: »

There is dressing sexy in a classy and comfortable fashion and wearing it mysteriously and there is dressing sexy in a tarty way everything on show, tight skimpy not much hidden. There is a difference.

Of course there is, earlier in the thread, I posted examples of what I felt was a clear distinction of the two:

OutlawPete wrote: »

Here's two photos of Davina McCall.

One is purely sexually manipulative and the other is not.

By the way, I think women should wear whatever the fcuk they want to wear.

honru

Five years since the release of Neil Strauss' The Game and people are still talking about negging... crazy.

Women have make up, men have pick up. The whole PUA thing emerged to even up the playing fields. As with anything, you can become obsessive with all this stuff... akin to a woman who has plastic surgery performed on every part on her body. Remove the "artistry" and strive to be a normal dude who has the ability to approach people confidently and put himself on the line. Most guys can't do that, however if it has the potential to give more choice for males in the dating realm I'm all for it.

flanno_7hi

consultech wrote: »

I have chimed in on this area before, hopefully not coming off as too sleazy at any time. I got into the whole PUA thing in a curious/light kind of way after reading Neil Strauss' "The game" back when I was 21 or so. I never did the creepy huge group meetup/plan of attack stuff or anything though. Moreso just used it when talking to girls one on one.

Bottom line - and probably to the upset of all the moral keyboard casanova's out there in inturrwebz land - the stuff actually does work if you're just trying to get ur hole, no matter what country you're in. It's popular for a reason. There is no such thing as prescribed one liners etc, that's the exact opposite of what is generally taught. They'll teach you to adopt your own style within the guidelines of how to treat women in a social setting, and how to knock them down a peg or two so you can actually talk to them without getting scowled at (welcome to Ireland).

I think people taking the "high road" in this area and ridiculing guys who practice PUA techniques (if even just casually, on their own) are gas because come 2am on a Saturday night - when they're frustrated chumps ringing the dancefloor with pint in hand, and have needed to get absolutely mouldy so they can even approach girls - they would give their right nut for a bit of structured and proven "game" technique. The other subset of the morality-brigade are usually women who really really don't like the idea that they're being played (the way they've played guys their whole life), and that men can actually be socially smarter than them.

That said, a solid bulk of the guys practicing this stuff are fairly dodgy, but it's just an extension of social intelligence with regard to chatting up girls. Some guys learn it growing up, some need to learn this stuff cause they caught on late. You're goin the complete wrong way about it if you're looking for a relationship from all this, you're attracting the wrong kinda girl. Ironically enough though, I originally ran some of this stuff on my beautiful long term girlfriend-to-be long before it got serious. I'm not so sure she would've noticed me without it, and she eventually grew to love me for a combination of personality and everything else.

FYI: The Mystery Method pretty much gave rise to the whole craze for anyone vaguely interested, it's probably moved on since then tho, long long time since I read anything...

:rolleyes:

FFS i can't believe people actually go in for this ****e. I learned how to talk to women when i learned how to talk. I can't believe people have tactics to get girls. You just talk to girls like human beings if you get on you get on if you don't you don't and if the girl scowls at you then you are either acting the knob, are one or she is so back away not today.

Ickle Magoo

OutlawPete wrote: »

Collins English Dictionary definition will do for me ..



I think it very clever

It's the man choosing to let the clothes affect him, it's not some kind of weird mind control via aesthetics - the whole "I'm just a dumb man who is manipulated at the mere sight of a bit of cleavage" act is kind of pathetic to be honest.

OutlawPete wrote: »

I'm not trying to "conflate" anything, I am just chilling out on a Saturday and having a discussion.

Wingmen were brought up and so I brought up the closest that I have come to what could be considered a 'wing woman'.

And again, lobbing a pal at a guy she fancies is hardly the same as acquiring a wingman to help "land a target" - it's the whole language and deliberate set up to take advantage of and get "women" that makes it all a bit distasteful. There is having a strategy to try to get a woman you fancy to see what a great guy you are and then there is employing negative psychology and third parties to manipulate a situation or a person dishonestly with less than honourable intentions.

I dunno - most of the PUA stuff I've heard is from people we've had to ban from PI for coming out with some really dodgy suggestions and claims. It just seems to attract a lot of creeps and works well for those with a creepy agenda & few real social skills; teaching them how to impose themselves subtly using guile and duplicity - though I accept the creeps we get proclaiming that all women think this and all woman want that are at the extreme end of things.

OutlawPete wrote: »

Ah, I do .. just wasn't my type, still waiting for someone to chuck Kristen Stewart at me, she drinks in Whelan's, right?

I didn't say that, not sure why you have me quoted there... :cool:

OutlawPete

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

It's the man choosing to let the clothes affect him, it's not some kind of weird mind control via aesthetics - the whole "I'm just a dumb man who is manipulated at the mere sight of a bit of cleavage" act is kind of pathetic to be honest.

The same could be said of the women.

They are too are "choosing to let the" guy's bullshit "affect" them.

The whole "I'm just a dumb woman who is manipulated at the mere sniff of a compliment" act is also kind of pathetic.

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

There is having a strategy to try to get a woman you fancy to see what a great guy you are and then there is employing negative psychology ..

The majority of PUA is not like that from what I have seen.

As I have said, it's is down to the guy to approach women and so I see nothing wrong with that.

For years, women's magazines have been full of "10 ways to land that guy" and the like and I see nothing wrong with guys learning a few chat up techniques so that can get a woman chatting rather than just get blanked or indeed, be told to "**** off".

If it were women that had to approach guys when out, then the bookshelves would be chocker block with same stuff for them and no doubt Oprah would have a weekly special on what to say to guys an what not to, in order to engage them in conversation.

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

I dunno - most of the PUA stuff I've heard is from people we've had to ban from PI for coming out with some really dodgy suggestions and claims.

This is just my opinion, but I think if these tactics were reversed and it were woman who were being told how to approach guys and what you should say to get them interested, not half as much attention would be paid to it.

Western society wraps women up in cotton wool in these situations as far as I'm concerned.

Would people respond the same if it were a guy who, after being approached by a woman, felt he had to sleep with her to make him feel better about himself??

My name is URL

OutlawPete wrote: »

How about a 'wing-woman'?

As, last night I (again) had a girl thrown into me by her friends.

I wasn't interested in her but her friend thought that if she kept on pushing her into me, I'd suddenly think: 'Oh, a female woman type person is upon me, I must consume her at once' ..

Anyone else aware of the phenomena of girls shoving their friends into men?

I likes it, usually.

I don't know if that's comparable.. sounds like something that would spontaneously happen rather than planned beforehand. A wing-man is someone appointed to 'deal' with the ugliest girl in a group so that the guy can engage with his target without her feeling guilty or concerned about her friend. As I said, as a way of improving your interpersonal skills it's fine, imo. But when it goes beyond self-improvement and into the realms of group orientated persuasion of girls then it starts to sound a bit iffy to me.

OutlawPete

My name is URL wrote: »

I don't know if that's comparable.. sounds like something that would spontaneously happen rather than planned beforehand. A wing-man is someone appointed to 'deal' with the ugliest girl in a group so that the guy can engage with his target without her feeling guilty or concerned about her friend. As I said, as a way of improving your interpersonal skills it's fine, imo. But when it goes beyond self-improvement and into the realms of group orientated persuasion of girls then it starts to sound a bit iffy to me.

It was an funny anecdote from last night.

I am not saying, nor trying to imply they were or are the same thing.

She was the girl's wing-woman last night, in what she did .. that is all.

As I said .. "I likes it".

Ickle Magoo

OutlawPete wrote: »

The same could be said of the women.

They are too are "choosing to let the" guy's bullshit "affect" them.

The whole "I'm just a dumb woman who is manipulated at the mere sniff of a compliment" act is also kind of pathetic.

It's not just compliments tho is it? Or I'd be in agreement with you. Using a wingman to get rid of a problematic friend so a guy can hone in on someone he intends to coerce into bed with psycho-babble is a completely different kettle of fish.

I don't think you can have it both ways, you can't complain that women tell guys that just want to a chat to get to know them better to bugger off and are rude when they are also having to deal with these creeps every weekend.

OutlawPete wrote: »

The majority of PUA is not like that from what I have seen.

As I have said, it's is down to the guy to approach women and so I see nothing wrong with that.

For years, women's magazines have been full of "10 ways to land that guy" and the like and I see nothing wrong with guys learning a few chat up techniques so that can get a woman chatting rather than just get blanked or indeed, be told to "**** off".

If it were women that had to approach guys when out, then the bookshelves would be chocker block with same stuff for them and no doubt Oprah would have a weekly special on what to say to guys an what not to, in order to engage them in conversation.

As above, we now seem to now have a system that is perpetuating the **** offs trying to circumvent the **** offs. Not great.

Chat up techniques I have no issue with, cleavage I have no issue with - again, it's only the underhand methodology on the fringes...rather than suggesting every woman who dresses up is manipulating, I think a better analogy with respect to PUA is a girl flashing cleavage to get free drinks all night from a guy she has no interest in.

OutlawPete wrote: »

This is just my opinion, but I think if these tactics were reversed and it were woman who were being told how to approach guys and what you should say to get them interested, not half as much attention would be paid to it.

Western society wraps women up in cotton wool in these situations as far as I'm concerned.

Would people respond the same if it were a guy who, after being approached by a woman, felt he had to sleep with her to make him feel better about himself??

I hope so. I hope creepy manipulators are creepy manipulators regardless of gender. That sex is something that some men see as a prize to be gained if they use just the right kind of learnt coercion is pretty horrible, surely you agree with that?

That there is an entire business model now built up around that whole idea is distasteful - and when it gets to the stage of specific tactics or even scarily, group tactics, to elicit response and present a false situation with the express purpose of being duplicitous in order to trigger a sexual encounter then it's treading on dodgy territory - if guys want to know why it's so hard to get girls to take them seriously, not question their motives or stop calling them creeps, they need look no further.

OutlawPete

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

.. you can't complain that women tell guys that just want to a chat to get to know them better to bugger off and are rude when they are also having to deal with these creeps every weekend.

The amount of guys using PUA, would be around 2% of people out on the pull, I would say.

The amount of women that are rude to men for little or no reason other that they tried to chat to them, would be quite higher.

Blaming that on guys PUA techniques is laughable.

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

I think a better analogy with respect to PUA is a girl flashing cleavage to get free drinks all night from a guy she has no interest in.

Last night, the free drinks were going to girls who were french kissing each other.

I didn't buy them, I assure you, allthough, I did enjoy the show

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

I hope so. I hope creepy manipulators are creepy manipulators regardless of gender.

They are not though, women are rarely seen as "creepy" when they act in the same way as a man does that is being described as such.

We have Cougars vs Dirty Old Men for instance.

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

That sex is something that some men see as a prize to be gained if they use just the right kind of learnt coercion is pretty horrible, surely you agree with that?

Well, that that's about as a loaded a question as I have seen in quite awhile.

If a woman wants sex, she can get it very easily.

In the main, guys can't.

If woman had to work as hard at getting laid, as men do, they might have a different opinion.

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

.. if guys want to know why it's so hard to get girls to take them seriously, not question their motives or stop calling them creeps, they need look no further.

Again, that's very easy to say.

Is a woman a "creep" if she comes onto a guy??

Is a woman a "creep" if her motive is to get laid??

When it comes to pulling on nights out, women have it every which way but loose, they can just dance or stand around and guys will come to you.

Guys can't do that unless they are very good looking and so they must approcah girls and try and chat with them.

Women have no idea what guys are going to say to them.

If they are really drunk and being obnoxious that is fine, but that makes up for about 5% of the guys that I see approaching girls only to have them rudely turn their backs to their faces and roll their eyes at their mates.

That's if they're lucky, being called a creep for simply saying 'Hi, what's you name' or 'Hello, how are you', is usually par for the course when guys are out clubbing.

Keep coming up with excuses as to why women feel they can be rude to guys for a little or no reason though, I always find them very interesting.

Ickle Magoo

OutlawPete wrote: »

The amount of guys using PUA, would be around 2% of people out on the pull, I would say.

The amount of women that are rude to men for little or no reason other that they tried to chat to them, would be quite higher.

Blaming that on guys PUA techniques is laughable.

I keep hearing about all these rude women but having never been on the dating circuit in ireland, I'll have to bow to your superior knowledge.

OutlawPete wrote: »

Last night, the free drinks were going to girls who were french kissing each other.

I didn't buy them, I assure you, allthough, I did enjoy the show

Yeah, stuff like that makes me cringe...

OutlawPete wrote: »

They are not though, women are rarely seen as "creepy" when they act in the same way as a man does that is being described as such.

We have Cougars vs Dirty Old Men for instance.

I think the issue is much more complex than just terminology...I wouldn't view a 50yr old man having sex with a 35yr old woman as a dirty old man, in reverse she's be a cougar. Dirty old men are strictly reserved for the mac wearing, thigh rubbing, fake bebo account types.

OutlawPete wrote: »

Well, that that's about as a loaded a question as I have seen in quite awhile.

If a woman wants sex, she can get it very easily.

In the main, guys can't.

If woman had to work as hard at getting laid, as men do, they might have a different opinion.

But they don't so we're left with the question of whether, just because women can get laid easier, it's okay for some men to use coercion and falsehoods to get what they want. I say not.

OutlawPete wrote: »

Again, that's very easy to say.

Is a woman a "creep" if she comes onto a guy??

Is a woman a "creep" if her motive is to get laid??

When it comes to pulling on nights out, women have it every which way but loose, they can just dance or stand around and guys will come to you.

Guys can't do that unless they are very good looking and so they must approcah girls and try and chat with them.

Fine, I don't think anyone has suggested approaching women or even being horny are crimes. What is being called creepy is setting up a scenario and using less than honest and forthright techniques to get sex with women who have self-esteem issues. I'm not sure how you can dress that up not to be creepy.

OutlawPete wrote: »

Women have no idea what guys are going to say to them.

If they are really drunk and being obnoxious that is fine, but that makes up for about 5% of the guys that I see approaching girls only to have them rudely turn their backs to their faces and roll their eyes at their mates.

That's if they're lucky, being called a creep for simply saying 'Hi, what's you name' or 'Hello, how are you', is usually par for the course when guys are out clubbing.

Keep coming up with excuses as to why women feel they can be rude to guys for a little or no reason though, I always find them very interesting.

Lol, likewise your reasons why men can use someone else's bought techniques to manipulate women into bed just because they lack their own basic social skills. :pac:

I think a lot of women find the whole idea that some men can't even hold a coherent conversation with them or only do so with the express purposes of copping a feel a bit of a turn off. You can't really blame them, really.

Scanlas The 2nd

There seems to be a belief on this thread that the only way you can learn how to get women into bed is through tricking her.

You can learn how to be more attractive. Learn to be fearless, decisive, assertive, in control, someone who takes charge, someone who doesn't care what anyone thinks. When you can learn and develop these natural instincts that are in all men at least deep down, and throw in social intelligence and an understanding of women and what turns them on you will have women fighting to get you in bed even if you are ugly.
This really is true.

Reading this thread is like being in a time warp, it's a discussion of PUA techniques that were found to be less than optimal years ago,The thought of having to ask a woman's opinion to talk to a woman or group of women is just simply not cool. Walk up and say whatever you want and amuse yourself.

Say stuff that comes from you and your unique interpretion of the world.
A good way to approach when you have the above traits would be to say something like "Hey, I saw you and had to come over and flirt with you for a bit".

On the rudeness issue, everyone has a right to be rude, get over it.

honru

I'm hearing a lot of this "Irish women are rude" business and to me it sounds like a self-fulfilling prophecy. I've had more non-verbal rejections than verbal ones but never has an Irish woman, or any woman for that matter, told me to "**** off" to my face.

It does seem in my experience that Irish women are more reserved at first compared to, say, American women. Possibly a result of living in a country with a cooler climate. If she's not interested in talking to you, it really isn't important to understand why as there could be a hundred different reasons. But guys take these things personally.

Non-verbal rejections are hard to recover from but I guess life is to give you a little s*** from time to time.

Dudess

A woman will dress sexily when she goes out because she likes feeling desirable, not necessarily with the cynical intention of cock-teasing and manipulating men, even if that's how some of them interpret it - it's pretty straightforward.
Peakoutput, I didn't say PUAs are necessarily manipulative, but I was responding to OutlawPete's assertion that some are, the way some women can be manipulative with their bodies merely by dressing in a way that might cause a stirring in the auld loins for many guys. Women usually enjoy feeling desired by men - it's an ego boost. Dressing sexily is not necessarily an exploitation of men, and it's not necessarily with the purpose of pulling, which the PUA stuff is.

RedXIV wrote: »

However, the people who take this material to try and better themselves and to make themselves more confident in social situations is definitely something that can shown as a parallel with girls doing themselves up for a night out. Most of these guys and girls have no intentions of manipulating people but they are prepared to present themselves in the most attractive light they are capable of.

Cool - much fairer way of putting it than "manipulating with their bodies" which is... scary tbh.

OutlawPete

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

I keep hearing about all these rude women but having never been on the dating circuit in ireland, I'll have to bow to your superior knowledge.

I don't approach woman, have done maybe twice in my life.

I find that it's best to meet mates in groups that are bringing their girlfriends, as their girlfriends will have friends and once you know someone in a group, girls seem far more willing to start chatting to you.

I do however see it all the time, with pubs as packed as the ones I go to, you can hardly miss it and its getting worse.

I see girls regularly assaulting men and people just turning a blind eye, if it was a woman being assailted, it would be the other way around.

Girls are becoming more and more like guys when out, that ever before.

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Yeah, stuff like that makes me cringe...

Ah, I don't mind that so much

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Dirty old men are strictly reserved for the mac wearing, thigh rubbing, fake bebo account types.

I'm 37 and been called it quite a few times.

Particularity when I talk about what I want to do to Hannah Montana.

All the thirty something Boardsie ladies be Cougars though when they talk about young men from Twilight and the like.

Damn sexism.

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

But they don't so we're left with the question of whether, just because women can get laid easier, it's okay for some men to use coercion and falsehoods to get what they want. I say not.

Of course it is, but it depends on which falsehoods and what type of coercion.

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

I think a lot of women find the whole idea that some men can't even hold a coherent conversation with them or only do so with the express purposes of copping a feel a bit of a turn off. You can't really blame them, really.

Of course not, why would I?

However, I am NOT talking about that, as I have made it clear.

I am talking about women's reactions to guys who are not really drunk and just say 'hello' and try to start a conversation.

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

What is being called creepy is setting up a scenario ..

Just on the scenario bit.

Women can set up scenarios with their body language quote easy, so I don't see anything wrong with that if it is harmless enough, most of the PUA scenarios that I have seen, appear to be just that, harmless.

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

.. and using less than honest and forthright techniques ...

Can you be specific about the techniques though?

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

.to get sex with women who have self-esteem issues.

Come on, if I told anyone that a girl came up to me last night and said things that made me feel vulnerable and so I shagged her in the hope of feeling better about myself, they'd laugh their ass off.

I see no reason why we should feel any different when it's a woman.

Woman wanted equality, maybe it's about time they stopped expecting society to protect them and feel empathy for them in situations where if the sexes were reversed, nobody would care.

You can say that you would 'hope' that people would care, but the fact of the mattter is, that they wouldn't.

We have a situation in this country where if a young boy and girl have sex, the boy is a criminal and the girl is not.

If that was the other way around, it would never be allowed to happen.

It may seem to be an entirely different issue, but the context is the same, society by and large protects and provides an empathetic blanket for women and girls and men and boys are not afforded the same respect.

Sardonicat

OutlawPete wrote: »

Come on, if I told anyone that a girl came up to me last night and said things that made me feel vulnerable and so I shagged her in the hope of feeling better about myself, they'd laugh their ass off.

Well, I wouldn't.

Personally, I think these kind of mind games only work on the very young and inexperienced or the very insecure. And to use that kind of psychological manipulation on either group is pretty nasty, whether you are male or female.

If I like a guy and he suddenly seems disinterested then I assume he's lost interest and forget about him. If he was trying to neg then he'd have shot himself in the foot.

Ickle Magoo

OutlawPete wrote: »

....Of course not, why would I?

However, I am NOT talking about that, as I have made it clear.

I am talking about women's reactions to guys who are not really drunk and just say 'hello' and try to start a conversation.

Well that's just rude - but on the other hand I can remember getting annoyed and frustrated and lads trying to elbow into me and my mates when we were out having a fun night out - I don't doubt there are plenty of rude women (people) out there but lads having a bit more cop on with regards to just trying to hump anything that moves might help the greater cause.

OutlawPete wrote: »

Just on the scenario bit.

Women can set up scenarios with their body language quote easy, so I don't see anything wrong with that if it is harmless enough, most of the PUA scenarios that I have seen, appear to be just that, harmless.

How do you falsely set a scenario using aesthetics? I don't know what you mean.

OutlawPete wrote: »

Can you be specific about the techniques though?

Well some of the suggestions in PI range from women not really meaning no when they say no and that to keep pushing until they actually slap you is the way forward to enlisting mates to get rid of any "problematic" friends keeping an eye out for their not so sober mate.

OutlawPete wrote: »

Come on, if I told anyone that a girl came up to me last night and said things that made me feel vulnerable and so I shagged her in the hope of feeling better about myself, they'd laugh their ass off.

I see no reason why we should feel any different when it's a woman.

Fine - but don't then complain that you get called a creep.

OutlawPete wrote: »

Woman wanted equality, maybe it's about time they stopped expecting society to protect them and feel empathy for them in situations where if the sexes were reversed, nobody would care.

You can say that you would 'hope' that people would care, but the fact of the mattter is, that they wouldn't.

We have a situation in this country where if a young boy and girl have sex, the boy is a criminal and the girl is not.

If that was the other way around, it would never be allowed to happen.

It may seem to be an entirely different issue, but the context is the same, society by and large protects and provides an empathetic blanket for women and girls and men and boys are not afforded the same respect.

There are very obvious biological and historical factors - that in 2010 there are men willing to pay 500 bucks to learn how to manipulate a woman to have sex with them is exactly why the protection exists & bleating about inequality and societies views of men and sex on a thread where several are vociferously defending a seminar on how to get women to have sex with men they wouldn't ordinarily look at/want to is kind of ironic. :P

OutlawPete

Dudess wrote: »

A woman will dress sexily when she goes out because she likes feeling desirable, not necessarily with the cynical intention of cock-teasing ..

Of course it is, women just lie to themselves when it comes this issue, so that they can feel better about themselves, that is all.

You say women want to feel "desired" .. well that's "sexually desired".

When men 'sexually desire' women, their brains send signals to their cock.

So, yes .. they are 'cock teasing' when they are trying to get men to sexually desire them.

Dudess wrote: »

Women usually enjoy feeling desired by men - it's an ego boost.

Oh, I don't doubt it, I'm sure 'cock teasing' is an ego boost.

Sardonicat

OutlawPete wrote: »

Of course it is, women just lie to themselves when it comes this issue, so that they can feel better about themselves, that is all.

You say women want to feel "desired" .. well that's "sexually desired".

When men 'sexually desire' women, their brains send signals to their cock.

So, yes .. they are 'cock teasing' when they are trying to get men to sexually desire them.



Oh, I don't doubt it, I'm sure 'cock teasing' is an ego boost.

And likewise, when women sexually deisre men, their brains send signals to their clits (excuse my coarseness ). So, if I see a particulalry attractive man dressed in a way that he accentuates his desirability do I assume that he is out to tease? No, I think that guy is sexy. End of.

K-9

OutlawPete wrote: »

Of course it is, women just lie to themselves when it comes this issue, so that they can feel better about themselves, that is all.

You say women want to feel "desired" .. well that's "sexually desired".

When men 'sexually desire' women, their brains send signals to their cock.

So, yes .. they are 'cock teasing' when they are trying to get men to sexually desire them.

Huh, so a women dressing sexily is a cock tease?

I don't think there is any major harm in the PUA stuff, if used in small doses. As somebody else mentioned earlier, decent lads will gain something from it, just don't take it too seriously.

OutlawPete

Sardonicat wrote: »

.. (excuse my coarseness ).

No bother, I believe Dudess brought cocks into it, so work away

Sardonicat wrote: »

So, if I see a particulalry attractive man dressed in a way that he accentuates his desirability do I assume that he is out to tease?

IF .. a guy dresses in a way, that he knows/hopes would make women desire him sexually .. then yes, of course the guy is out to tease women sexually, sure that is his goal.

K-9 wrote: »

Huh, so a women dressing sexily is a cock tease?

Subtle difference, but I'll repeat myself.

IF .. a woman dresses in a way, that she knows would make men desire her sexually and that is ultimately her goal (to be sexually desired) then yes .. of course she is out to sexually tease men.

Dudess

OutlawPete wrote: »

Of course it is, women just lie to themselves when it comes this issue, so that they can feel better about themselves, that is all.

Fukkin' hell...

You say women want to feel "desired" .. well that's "sexually desired".

When men 'sexually desire' women, their brains send signals to their cock.

So, yes .. they are 'cock teasing' when they are trying to get men to sexually desire them.



Oh, I don't doubt it, I'm sure 'cock teasing' is an ego boost.

Fukkin' hell...

The sh1t you say is disgraceful.

Sardonicat

Perhaps her goal is to get laid with a man that she finds sexually desirable, Outlaw. Does that mean all the rest are being teased?

Look, I know a guy who is a sexy, sexy boy and he knows how to make the most of it through his style and manner. He is not remotely interested in me. I do not think I am being teased by this man, he's just letting it be known that he is hot to trot and I would imagine that a woman meeting his criteria would get lucky. Doesn't mean he's teasing me. (Quite enjoy looking at him tho )

fungun

I think Petes point is that this negging is essentially a technique to make the guy more sexually attractive to the woman. It is a little different to dressing nicely but has the same net result.

People are always going to try to look and act at their most attractive when on the pull. Some of this is looks, some of this is conversation techniques.

It becomes a grey area when it crosses from trying to appear cocky and confident which is attractive to the woman (and may include some of the same types of comments) to actually putting the woman down to try to get into her pants. I actually dont think the latter is that common or that successful, its being cocky and confident that works.

Sardonicat

Negging is nasty, manipulative and creepy. It is only likely to work on some one with very low self-esteem already, so even more damage is done.

And the 'ol push/pull technique is certainly alive and well. As I said above, those of us who are not maniplulative will take someone at their word if they act disinterested or put us down. Off we toddle....

K-9

OutlawPete wrote: »

Subtle difference, but I'll repeat myself.

IF .. a woman dresses in a way, that she knows would make men desire her sexually and that is ultimately her goal (to be sexually desired) then yes .. of course she is out to sexually tease men.

I think Sardonicat puts it slightly better.

Super-Rush

OutlawPete wrote: »

No bother, I believe Dudess brought cocks into it, so work away



IF .. a guy dresses in a way, that he knows/hopes would make women desire him sexually .. then yes, of course the guy is out to tease women sexually, sure that is his goal.



Subtle difference, but I'll repeat myself.

IF .. a woman dresses in a way, that she knows would make men desire her sexually and that is ultimately her goal (to be sexually desired) then yes .. of course she is out to sexually tease men.

No Pete, just no.

Sardonicat

K-9 wrote: »

I think Sardonicat puts it slightly better.

Sexy boy, is that you? Stop being such a tease.....

OutlawPete

Dudess wrote: »

The sh1t you say is disgraceful.

Why is it "disgraceful"?

I am saying the same thing goes for men.

You said that some women dress to be sexually desired and that gives them a "ego boost".

So, lets say we have a man or a woman in a nightclub, that have specificity dressed provocatively with the goal of being "sexually desired" by the opposite sex ..

.. how is 'Sexually desire me' not 'sexually teasing'?

Again, I refer to the photo of Davina McCall.

Some would say she is dressing like this, so that she can be sexually desired.

I agree, but in my view .. that is 'sexually teasing'.

Dudess

fungun wrote: »

I think Petes point is that this negging is essentially a technique to make the guy more sexually attractive to the woman. It is a little different to dressing nicely but has the same net result.

People are always going to try to look and act at their most attractive when on the pull. Some of this is looks, some of this is conversation techniques.

Could have been made without the misogyny, the pop psychology about how women lie to themselves etc. Imagine a woman saying something like that about men here! I dress in a way that makes me feel attractive when I go out. I wear make-up, long earrings, leave my hair down, a short-ish skirt, heels, a top with a hint of cleavage (I don't go the boob tube, skirt-barely-covering-arse, cripplingly high heels route) - I like looking good and yes, I like flattery... I'm human. I do not set out to undermine men though. The clothes I wear may not be blatantly in your face sexy but "sexy" can mean a lot of things.

Where the hell does anyone get off telling me my motivations are manipulative and expoitative because I'm a woman?! :mad: