It was funny how, after I already had a bunch of "lays" under my belt I realized that I actually had more of a clue early on before becoming a serious poster in the community. In some ways I was actually worse off having joined the seduction forum as a member. I had gotten needier and more analytical and filled my head with more garbage as a result. The only benefit of it is hindsight-based where I know that it is garbage. Even the best information had to be cleansed to extract the value. But I learned there really isn't a point in taking in good information if it's mixed in with bad information, because the end result is still information that's kind of bad. And if you could in fact distinguish between the two then you probably don't need it in the first place.
And to think some men go through much more than I've gone though and are still actively "picking up", having developed misogynistic views and a thick skin that looks like it's been left out in the sun too long. They only teach their path, one that gets results the way they interpret results to be, which is not necessarily the correct path or the one that will be best for you. That's why it's good to be away from everything in order to figure out what the correct path is. Think of it as being away from everyday influence (television, advertising, magazines, pop culture), and going somewhere for a length of time so that your mind will be undistracted. At this point you will become free to explore and question independently of anything. And at this point you will begin to see what is right and what is not right.
It also became very clear that getting advice from someone who has slept with hundreds of woman CAN lead you down a wrong path. Sure some of the advice can be useful and practical but you still have to question the process that was used. For example, let's say there is a man in his late forties, and let's say he spent 30 years in the "game". Assume he spends on average 10 hours a week chasing women, and gets laid with a new woman every 2-3 weeks, or every 20-30 hours of active pursuing. Over 30 years that's roughly 500-800 women he had sex with. He would appear to be a guru. But whatever "method" he teaches will ultimately come down to one thing, the law of averages. If you're willing to spend 20-30 hours for each piece of ass then over time you will have sex with a lot of different women. But the problem with that, certainly for me anyway, is that spending that much time and effort would be gut wrenching. I would rather stick surgical needles in my veins than go through THAT on an ongoing basis.
It was good that I had relatively little success for all the effort I put in because if I had more success it might have taken me longer to get where I am today. And to think that there are men who go through a lot more than what I went through and still do to this day, just to get laid. Needless to say I don't envy them.
I realized that the power women had over me came and went like an orgasm. There is indeed a biological need for "release" which can make men chase and act desperate. But jerk off and see how needy you feel then. Do you still envision yourself with this perfect woman you are fantasizing about?
Once I disconnected from the emotional need for sex (detachment) all that was left was the physical need which is easy enough to take care of. And really, why spend hours or days chasing after sex when that urge can be taken care of after one minute in the washroom? Too much information perhaps? But seriously. It frees up all the time you would have spent otherwise. Sure it's great to have actual sex but you have to weigh the cost vs. benefit. If my situation is such that I have more important things to do than go out, why would I put that on hold for something so fleeting as sexual gratification. Better to make it a byproduct. If I happen to meet someone I connect with as I naturally go about my business then that's a much better position to be coming from.
Pursuing women in today's modern dating environment is one of the most potentially painful things you can do. This is why it's so easy to not chase and be indifferent, because although social programming has taught me one thing, experience has taught me something very different. In a dating environment full of bad protocol and messed up views, it makes additional sense to be indifferent. If I had not encountered such a dysfunctional dating scene, it probably would have taken me longer to reach my ultimate mindset. So I am appreciative for being able to find this path faster, just because of how dysfunctional the dating scene is.
Having adopted this new approach, I'm much happier than before and I would never go back. I am basically normal again and have cleaned up most of the garbage in my head accumulated from two main episodes in my life. The first stemming from the bad social programming leading me up to the point when I joined the seduction community. And the other stemming from the bad programming of the community itself.
Indifferent For The Right Reasons
Most men are always willing to say "yes", and we're taught to say "no" or "maybe" only if it will help her say "yes". But inside of us we wanted her all along. So even though you may look like you don't want her it's a ruse because you actually do. I currently say no to girls anytime the situation doesn't suit me, or if something doesn't feel right. It could also be that I am busy doing something and don't feel like it, or it could be that the girl is incompatible with me in some way. This is not me pretending I'm disinterested, or playing hard-to-get to get them more interested. I am actually not interested.
You can't be indifferent just as a way to attract women. If you are then what will happen is that as soon as a woman shows interest you will have a tendency to revert back to chasing mode which can have a bad result. You have to be indifferent so that you are willing to say yes or no at those times of your choosing. Maybe you don't feel like having sex that night because maybe you're having a guys night out and don't want to be interrupted. Or it could be for any other reason. The point is that you're not hard up for women and are willing to say no without fear of loss. It's a subtle shift in your mentality when you do this. It's a whole other level where you truly become your own person and rise above the usual process where women are the choosers. You become like the women who can have sex any time they want so they only go out and get laid once in a while.
Sure, you can try acting like you're not pursuing (to help increase the odds), but in your mind you're still chasing, and the contrast will always be a struggle. You're still playing with fire and you can still be burned.
Indifference is the key. Being indifferent will allow you to easily pass by the bad women and not get attached to the women you would be compatible with. And by this I absolutely do not mean to be insensitive or without compassion. I am just emphasizing the benefit of not being outcome-oriented or clingy.
I hardly do any of the stuff I spent so much time learning in the past. I'll have normal conversations with women but won't put a lot of effort into trying to get them. The whole experience was just a big social workout which taught me social skills, and more importantly imparted wisdom on what not to do, and what's best to focus on. It is certainly true that making mistakes and learning from them is important in the process, but not ad nauseam. Know when something is just not working for you and move on.
Have a look at: Moving Beyond Seduction And "Picking Up" Women. It's a continuation of what I talk about here, on my other blog.
The Cult Mindset
I don't usually put names out there because many are evolving still, but there's one individual who seems eternally stuck in one way of thinking and is contributing a tremendous amount of bad information, and that is Mystery. For example, His 5 for 5 is one of the biggest sources of BS out there. He had claimed that out of 5 approaches (with intent), he can get 5 girlfriends. 100% conversion in other words. Now, I suppose if you do enough approaching you will eventually get several girls in a row, and it might even be that as you get better and better this will happen more often, even (gasp) 5 times in a row! But every girl? All the time? Come on! Nothing will turn you into a needy loser faster than trying to get every girl.
But what if you ACTUALLY could go 5 for 5 all the time?
Then I would say that you would be little more than a shell of a man, having no values, and nothing solid to convey to the world. It would be like being everything to everyone, and you would stand for nothing.
It's worth mentioning that the community was sort of okay in the beginning as a brief stint, as it provided some guidance for the very uninformed. But it really turned foul when commercialism took root. Then it just became too poisonous an environment to be a part of. I do not believe it's currently a good stepping stone to becoming a better man, anymore than touching a hot stove is. It will burn you and you won't really get anything out of it except to know that you shouldn't touch it. It only seems to help mostly those men who are so needy and so lacking of basic knowledge that anything that can shed some light on their problems comes as a godsend. This is not too different from needy serially clingy women who find salvation in "The Rules" and then claim it is the best thing out there. Holding on to a life-raft is not the same thing as being on solid land. At some point you have to progress.
One trend in the seduction community is to follow the guys who have attractive writing styles. And in fact, there is a lack of realism in some field/lay reports which sometimes play out like hollywood scripts. After all, what sounds cooler: 1) I met a girl at the bar as I was waiting in line, and we hung out after, or 2) I met this girl in line who was checking me out. So I pimped her using my trademark gangsta-style "what's up!", and she got with me.
These guys with attractive writing styles will tend to attract a fan base consisting of mostly lower grade thinkers who are easily taken in by flamboyant personalities. A fan base that confuses delivery with content and who assumes that intelligent spin doctoring equals real substance. It's a cult mentality. One way you can identify the ones who tend to attract cult like followings is by looking for instances where they have said opposing things but still had a strong following. That's not to say that their messages can't be true, just that they have the ability to draw people in even if they are delivering bad or false messages. It's important to be able to recognize the truth or falsehood in a message regardless of how it is presented.
Another thing which cult-like teachings have in common is that they don't encourage autonomy. They don't give people the tools and understanding such that they can move on and not have to go back for more. Instead they keep people hooked like junkies.
Pay close attention to the dogma that the authors of "The Rules" use to shield themselves from rational scrutiny:
• Don't discuss The Rules with your therapist
• Do The Rules even when your friends and parents think it's nuts
• Don't read books that advise against The Rules
• The only guys who will be turned off by this are the guys who weren't really interested in the first place
• Men have a biological need to pursue, so don't make things easy for them
• If you don't use The Rules you can easily end up alone
• The authors were once skeptical too, but it works
Now, pay close attention to the type of dogma some members of the seduction community use to shield themselves from rational scrutiny:
• Don't listen to what women say. What they say they want is the opposite of what they actually want
• It's your social programming that prevents you from understanding this. Disagreeing means you're in denial
• Women enjoy "the process". You are giving her the emotions she craves
• If men don't learn how to seduce attractive women their genes will be mercilessly weeded out of existence
• Don't try to think about this logically. Women are illogical creatures and logic doesn't apply to them
• If you speak out against the community you are being "negative", or "close-minded", or even "bitter because you're not getting laid"
Notice the similarities? They are attacking insecurities and shielding themselves from critical discourse in such a creepy fashion that I am at a loss to explain it. It's like being in a carnival funhouse. It can be thought of as slightly insane and sadistic at times. A place where people can experience a world very different from normal. But if you're there long enough you might start thinking that IT'S normal and the rest of the world is off.
It's a symptom of a result-oriented class of people with large egos who are determined to do anything to achieve their goals. Never mind the PR image of the focus being on "self-improvement" and "setting boundaries". It's a masquerade and smokescreen for justifying a lot of bad advice.
The truly scary part is that their teachings CAN work if you don't mind attracting the insecure, hedonistic, emotionally unregulated individuals. It is only by accident that you will meet someone worthwhile.
One reason that the people, whom these tactics would work on, wouldn't usually admit to it, is because no one (men and women) likes to admit to a weakness in character. Weak people generally don't admit they are weak.
It's like banking on people's character flaws to make yourself successful and calling that the method of choice.
If you want to have a clearer idea if what you are doing is manipulative, imagine yourself telling the other person what you are doing to get them interested ("I am using The Rules on you", or "I am using the Mystery Method on you"). Are you able to do it without shame? Or do you cringe at the idea of doing that and prefer to keep it a secret? See, a lot of these techniques that are lauded as "good" are in fact kept very much a secret by the person using them. Hmmm I wonder why that is.
There is so much crap out there that creates competitiveness and hostility between the sexes that you practically need a how-to guide just to sift through it all.
Be wary of anything that plays on ego and insecurities. Keep it simple and always think critically.
A Closer Look
There's a bit of bias in the community towards the really young girls, like late teens, and early 20s. Many guys including the "top level" ones will only hook up with these girls, claiming they are the best and hottest. I used to believe that for a little while but then I realized that generally, women over 30 are more attractive to me as they are more physically developed and more mature - nicer bodies and attitude generally. As an adolescent I remember having more sexual interest in my female teachers than in the young girls around my age.
Moreover, girls in their late teens and early 20s will more likely fall for the schtick of men in the seduction community and chase after them when they lay their self-esteem "bait". They usually aren't mature enough yet to be able to distinguish between truly self-confident guys and guys who are putting on an act. So you will be hard pressed to see these so-called seduction gurus with intelligent and confident older women.
Also, what men perceive as hot or beautiful, is usually the product of makeup and sexy clothing. So a "hot" girl with the attitude who wants special treatment, is part and parcel with the time and effort she spends on looking good. Another pretty girl who doesn't spend so much time in front of a mirror will be equivalent to her, but may have a better attitude. So it really makes no sense to treat the two any different. In fact, it's better to treat all women the same.
There's lots and lots of overanalysis and putting extra spin on topics. A good example is how the community teaches men to elicit a woman's values in order to better calibrate her (in order to seduce her). But women, who normally want to follow the man's lead, tend to want to calibrate us. So asking them questions to find out how to calibrate them often ends up with her giving answers based on what she thinks you want. But what's the point of doing that? She wants to follow your direction. So you're practically trying to find a way to give her the power while KNOWING that she wants you to hold on to it.
Women are attracted to dominant self-confident men, so it is contradictory for men to have to learn behavior that is attractive to them. It is contradictory to be dominant and try to "pass" her tests or criteria. You see the same thing in Dom/Sub relationships where you have the Sub "topping from the bottom". As an analogy it's like a woman controlling a man by using his sense of masculinity against him: If he doesn't measure up he's not man enough. It just doesn't match up. This is the major contradiction in the seduction community, which simultaneously teaches guys to be dominant and self-sufficient but only in such a way that it gets girls.
Chasing after women and learning how to attract them is counter to what makes men attractive in the first place. As soon as you ask the question "what do women want?", you start losing your way as a man.
On a similar vein, there's this other rampant idea in the community regarding "shit testing". The premise is that women test men (consciously and unconsciously) to see if they are "man enough". As said before, this contradicts the fact that women are attracted to self-confident men who don't try to please them. So for the most part, the "shit test" is an observation made by guys who harbor an adversarial attitude towards women - something fueled by the community and which often feeds off itself.
But for the sake of argument let's say a woman is testing me, and she is testing me to see if I am the kind of guy who won't try to please her or kiss her ass. But this creates a "pink elephant" scenario where I am concerned. If I try not to think of a pink elephant I will think of a pink elephant. Similarly, if I try not to please her (in order to attract her) then I'm trying to please her.
Women who test men in this manner are walking a fine line. They may actually annoy and push away the men they want by testing them. And it is indeed true that a dominant man would never put up with a woman testing him for long.
In fact, it seems more likely that a hedonistic women who enjoys masculine aggression would be interested in testing a man (pushing him) in order to get the reaction she craves. A woman who has achieved emotional maturity wouldn't do that.
The ultimate answer of course lies in being yourself. I may please you. I may not please you. But I'm always going to be myself whether anyone likes it or not.
There's this insistence in the community on the use of technical terms to describe male-female interactions. This is the typical nerd mentality at work, that everything must be categorized and assigned values, because it is a way of feeling like you have control. That sustained effort at micro-analysing things making even the simplest of normal tasks, like talking to strangers, tantamount to programming a robotic arm to move an object from A to B. And that disconnect from normal humanity that would see something like this as trivial. By analysing you can actually make things difficult for yourself.
There were a few people who discussed the futility in thinking too much but unfortunately it just became a fad, like positivity - something to bat around like a new toy, without really understanding it. Ironically if someone truly understood it they would just move on to other things.
Learning the "seduction" material didn't appear to be like following a normal learning curve. There were too many instances where I seemed to get worse or where learning something new seemed to contradict what I Iearned before. There was never a sense of inner peace about the whole thing, and it always felt like I was playing catch-up in a game whose rules were in a constant state of flux. Being in the seduction community in a way is like being buried underneath tons of snow after an avalanche, and unable to move. You have no sense of orientation and you don't know which way is up or down.
Another thing which is said in the seduction community is that engaging in logical discussion with women or trying to think logically about interactions with them, is counterproductive and causes women to lose attraction for you. What hogwash, and what a disturbing way of stopping rational decision making where women are concerned. The greatest tool you have to reason with becomes obsolete where women are concerned. What an incredibly ingenious and twisted way of propagating false beliefs by shrouding oneself in a cocoon that prevents truth from ever entering. It has all the makings of a cult: believe in this or suffer hell, but more subtly, as there are men who are very persuasive and who can argue false points making them seem true. These men who have made a career out of finding patterns and justifications for what THEY want to believe. ALWAYS pay attention to the message and DON'T get caught up in the delivery. Always keep logic and reason close at hand.
If you constantly end up getting burned doing something then stop doing it. There's a belief in the community that it makes you more of a man to be able to endure getting your ass kicked by women on a regular basis. But really, it just shows how the line between stupidity and masculinity has become blurred.
It's your ego that tells you that you have to keep trying or keep taking the difficult path. You just have to realize it's your ego and put your rational mind in charge instead.
An Insiders Look
A common cycle: You go out with a girl. You like her and she seems to like you. You start fixating and imagine yourself spending more time with her. You build it up in your head. You imagine scenarios that bring you and her closer together. You become "invested". She senses this and starts pulling away. You get upset. You then wonder how girls can do this to guys. But it was all you who did that. It has nothing to do with her.
Now, it is true that some women shut you out of their lives immediately if you show any signs of neediness. And in some ways this is extreme and has a narcissistic component, but in some cases there's also a wisdom component where she knows from past experience that guys who typically start doing "this" are going to end up being like "that", and she doesn't want the trouble.
Women, especially attractive ones, know very well that they could get a man any time they want. But what happens? It becomes uninteresting to them. They are bored by how "common" it is, and so, some of them look for ways to get more. They may start demanding incredible "chemistry", or special treatment, sometimes using sex as leverage. And they can become very spoiled, with narcissistic tendencies. They are slaves to their desires just like the men chasing after them who are driving the process in the first place.
All this fuss some women make about wanting "chemistry" and "sparks" can be signs of narcissistic craving, that hedonistic desire for stimulation when "common" doesn't cut it. It's not enough for them to be attracted to a man. They also have to feel a flush of intense emotions otherwise they move on, sometimes moving on anyway as familiarity quickly becomes boring.
One more reason to act normal and be yourself. You attract the most level-headed women who are compatible with you over the long run.
The Choice To Not Pursue Women At All
This is a screen capture taken from Lavalife. I set up a fake woman's profile. I put up a picture of a very attractive woman and wrote a brief profile saying that I was interested in meeting a nice guy who I could have fun with. Pretty cookie-cutter stuff. This is the result after a few hours. It speaks for itself.
A man would get at most 10% the number of responses. Think of this as a representation of the big picture, and of what is actually happening out there.
Therefore...
My choice to not pursue women at all, albeit extreme, is a reaction to the way things are. Maybe if the balance of power between the sexes was more equal, then I would perhaps do some of the pursuing some of the time. But as it stands right now, it's just too much of a minefield to navigate through and there's too much effort involved to "break through". So not only is this extreme much healthier for me, but in some respects it is also a way of helping to restore the balance.
It is worth mentioning that many of these relationship books out there which are intended to empower women basically just teach ways for women to grab even more of the power for themselves. It's like a book for rich people entitled: How to get rich-er. It's not a way for women to correct an imbalance in power (except in some cases), but a way for them to tighten their grip on the power even more, usually by requiring that men do even more. They appeal to women's egos, and make no effort to distill rational thought or impart self-control with regards to emotions and impulses. And of course this sells. It's all about ME and what *I* want. Taking a deep hard look at oneself is just not as marketable it would seem.
These books have a tendency to raise the bar on what women feel entitled to by making sure that they are treated no less than a princess. And the men: Pony up!
In conclusion...
The reason it makes sense to treat women as 100% equals in the dating game is because they can: 1) judge the effectiveness of your approach, 2) decide to make it easy or more difficult for you, 3) can tell if you're being real or fake.
All these things point towards someone's capacity to do it themselves.
So by all means, let's treat women as equals.
