The PUA community

Post Reply New Topic

I never said appearance was all that matters. I really doubt a man would be emotionally abusive to you on the internet. People are emotionally abusive usually only after getting to know their victims well. If you knew these men in person, it could be a different story though. I feel that you probobly reject those guys due to you either thinking theyre too weird or not good looking enough for you.

you're drawing conclusions about her tastes based on absolutely nothing.

PUA material is not all as bad as people here are making it out to be. Yeah, there are PUA stuff that I don't agree with at all, but that doesn't mean it's bad advice. It's just not for me and several other Aspies (I may suspect).

Actually, why label it PUA stuff? Most of the concepts of PUA are from certain psychology sources that guide a man on how to better himself as a person. It's really psychology at the end of the day. Learn about it. Know about it. Apply it in your life. And notice the outcome.

I'm a changed person in attitude thanks to these materials. People also respect me more now than before. So don't let anyone here mislead you into thinking it's completely bad.

why not just use a legitimate source of counselling that doesn't involve manipulating and seducing women, then? there are many of them out there.

What manipulation exactly? Not all PUA stuff is about manipulating. Unless your definition of manipulation is so broad that one could argue that women manipulate men all the time.

Seducing women? What is wrong with that? Sometimes, for some men, the only way to get a lover/wife is through seduction. Seduction is mostly a psychological activity that is done subconsciously rather than an intended pure physical activity. There is nothing wrong with seduction at least not when abused.

I keep seeing this pattern popping up when people defend PUA. Not all of it is evil...



Broadly speaking, 'manipulation' (used free from negative bias) isn't absolutely bad. It's all about intent, in my view. The core intent behind PUA material is to get sex from women.



Nothing, unless you are only doing it for your own gratification alone. That's called using people.

I don't know if you've ever had a woman pretending she finds you attractive just so you do something for her? Well this is that, except for guys. And guys usually want sex.

There is no word or systematic and monetized method of doing that for women yet, afaik, so we don't have a convenient term like 'PUA' to lump it under. Hey maybe there's a gap in the market



Agreed.

what I think is strange is that men (or my ex bf) are perfectly ok with reading every PUA book on the market but wont read any relationships self help books!

I guess PUA appeals to men's desire to have sex. Relationship books appeal to women's desire to relate.

yes Ive noticed that after the sex men loose any interest in 'maintaining' the relationship such as being nice or sympathetic or interested in anything I say.

I think the answer must be to never have sex so they are constantly in seduction mode and best behaviour.

Maybe there's a middle way

I don't know. All this stuff has got me interested in male/female dynamics again; mating habits and relationships.

What I'm usually interested in is win win scenarios for everyone. Ideally, men should get what they want, and women should get what they want, with some compromises; probably.

I think that's my problem with the main thrust (fnar) of PUA material. It is essentially about getting without giving. Selfishness is essentially a childish trait, as someone very smartly pointed out earlier (I think it was Bucephalus). A mature person, or system designed to lead one towards true personal development, must have non selfishness as a part of its core.

Last edited by Moog on 08 Jun 2011, 5:13 am, edited 1 time in total.

You agree with me on some of the stuff, so what exactly do you disagree with me about? That having sex with someone for one's own gratification (even if it makes the other person also gratified) is not wrong?

I'm personally against dishonest tactics from both genders (men and women). There are all kinds of men who read this PUA stuff, and each kind will use/abuse these materials according to his desires and goals and personality and attitude and way of thinking.

But you can't blame the writings for encouraging men to be more comfortable being men instead of feeling shamed by this feministic world. Yeah, there are some creepy authors out there (like this Ross Jeffries dude), but are you going to tell me that someone like Neil Strauss is a bad guy for writing a book called "The Game" that teaches men how to be better men and, thus, more attractive to women? Maybe he is a bad guy, but a lot of women sure seem to love him even those who profess that they don't agree with what he's written.

What exactly is the issue really? That a select few PUA authors encourage malicious behavior? If so, I bloody agree with you. That's a big issue, indeed. Other than that, we might as well be as objective as we can be on our thoughts concerning PUA stuff.

Yes. Select few is a subjective statement. Saying that they are all bad is also subjective. The truth usually lies somewhere in between extreme statements.

I don't feel I need to be a 'better man', I don't feel particularly shamed by feminist whatever (maybe you can explain what exactly you mean by that, and how you feel ashamed, perhaps in another thread). I don't really want to alter the way I approach women in any considerable way.

I don't believe men should stop acting like men, in fact I encourage all people to find constructive outlets for every natural energetic impulse. But men who stoop to sneaky tricks to shag women are not being themselves at all, neither do I think it very constructive.

I did have a fairly neutral opinion on PUA stuff until aspieguy or whoever came along trying to sell it as a cure for autistic social awkwardness, and I did a little more investigating.

Language and psychology, like any tools, can be used for good or evil. Responsibility and intention, that's what it's all about. I fear that many people given these tools will use them destructively, because PUA essentially prioritises one thing over any other.

Maturity, responsiblity, unselfishness and a growth in consciousness may come as an accidental or incidental consequence of using this material, but not necessarily because the material directs people towards that. I am not personally aware of any PUA material that emphasises or even gives equal place to those ends. More likely that a guy who can apply it well gets stuck in a destructive loop.

I am prepared to have my mind changed, but all I've seen so far has only cemented my view. I really need to see some real evidence of the touted wonderful non seduction related benefits of using PUA material that cannot be learned through pursuing less seedy developmental paths.

If I was a smarter and less lazy guy, I'd embed a bone fide development path inside a trojan horse of PUA-esque material. That would be interesting.

Start off giving the impression that you're going to help guys get laid, then lead them on a course that engenders true consciousness expansion and self actualisation. This appeals to my sense of humour.

Sex sells.

Moog, i completely agree about it being a selfish act. i couldn't articulate what is wrong with PUA systems, but you have explained what i couldn't put my finger on - PUA stuff is ultimately for personal gain. learning it may have some unintended consequences in positive personal development, but the core of the programs is self-serving intent. i think that core effectively negates any potential positives. it promotes the opposite of what society should be working towards.

Exactly.

To me PUA is an outgrowth or reflection of the times; greed and selfishness aren't even universally recognised as evils; in fact the prevailing culture seems to see everything in terms of commodities to be plundered (including people), so it doesn't surprise me that some are struggling to comprehend.

And you can borrow my finger anytime

Really? It already happened. He was constantly messaging me, telling me that I wasn't good enough for him and yet invited me over for drinks anyway. Are you really so f*****g daft that you think abuse only happens in person? So yes, I rejected that guy because he was already treating me like s**t. Appearance isn't everything for me because I actually care about personaliy because I'm not shallow like SOME people in this forum. :/