Video on how to get a woman?

[Heraclitus]

And that's the problem. We must, in your words, devalue ourselves because others are doing so. Just because others are in the muck doesn't mean I have to be in there as well. I prefer to hold myself higher and have better intentions than those who are constantly seeing life as a game to be won or lost. It is those people I feel most sorry for, because they are never truly happy, but always playing their little game.

I know you belive in an afterlife. But.

Why don't you have some decency towards those future generations that will be stuck down here in the mud?

Have you ever asked yourself why we aren't complete monsters? Because natural selection rewarded people for not being complete monsters!


If one is to acheive anything like moral progress one needs to change the game. Do you oppose changing the game so that virtue is rewarded and malice punished more than it is now?

[Heraclitus]

Is it really ad hominem if it appears to be close to the truth?

You're missing the very point of the ad hominen fallacy. Even if the accusation or personal attack is true, this dosen't mean the person isn't right.

[Imran Siddiqui]

It appears that playing "the game" to get women is more akin to rewarding malice. To believe it is rewarding virtue is so utterly and amazingly deluded.

[Heraclitus]

It appears that playing "the game" to get women is more akin to rewarding malice. To believe it is rewarding virtue is so utterly and amazingly deluded.

You have a short memory.


Playing the game may be wrong and may reward malice. But acknowledging the game is played is not rewarding malice. I do not confuse is with should. Deluding oneself about ones imagined virtue will only ****** any form of self correction!

Anyway to stop this depressing talk about the game that is life and get back to the fun and lovely game that deals with women. Game is noting but a manual on how to flirt. It is the science of daiting and relationships. Its not hacking a girls brain or tricking her, in fact Mystery (a respected PUA) specifically advised against lying for example, he als advised to ensure she is comfortable and glad to be around you, ect.. Like the Karma Sutra, books about game are morally neutral manuals that describe how the world is and what results actions have.

Or do you belive the apple in the garden of Eden to have been knowledge like Neitzsche said afterall?

[DaShi]

You're missing the very point of the ad hominen fallacy. Even if the accusation or personal attack is true, this dosen't mean the person isn't right.

I didn't post it as a personal attack. I posted it because it was right and true. How you feel about it is irrelevant. When you're older you will understand. . .and regret.

Frankly, I'd just rather get to the heart of the matter than listen to any more of your pseudo-intellectual bull****.

[Heraclitus]

I didn't post it as a personal attack. I posted it because it was right and true. How you feel about it is irrelevant. When you're older you will understand. . .and regret.

You may be right. Or you may be wrong. In either case your statement dealed with my motivation or pehaps the reason I was (if I am rationalizing) that I arguing as I argue.

But my motivation or supposed real reasons have no bearing on the merit of the arguments I present.

Frankly, I'd just rather get to the heart of the matter than listen to any more of your pseudo-intellectual bull****.

I don't recall you ever presenting a coherent argument against my claims. Ever. As you say in this post you simply decided it was bull**** before reading it.
I may be wrong. I may be right. But you can't really know that can you? I'm not saying you should bother figuring it out, there are too many fools in the world for that of this I agree.

But, why do you spend all this energy commenting my posts with brain farts? Are you ignoring the idiot, or attacking an enemy?

[DaShi]

Yes it does. You are just trying to rationalize your behavior with pseudo-scientific drivel. It's a waste of time to argue with because it is nonsense. It's like arguing with Ben, only Ben is cleverer. You post nonsense and ask people to disprove it for you. The sooner you realize this, the sooner you can shut up. Grow a ****ing brain and learn to think for yourself.

[Heraclitus]

Yes it does. You are just trying to rationalize your behavior with pseudo-scientific drivel. It's a waste of time to argue with because it is nonsense. It's like arguing with Ben, only Ben is cleverer. You post nonsense and ask people to disprove it for you. The sooner you realize this, the sooner you can shut up. Grow a ****ing brain and learn to think for yourself.

Can I just ask which of my stated opinions first made you this angry at me?

[Heraclitus]

Anyway... you don't seem to get it do you.


I changed how I behave after I changed my opinion on certain things after reading the "pseudo-scientifict drivel".

I didn't search out "pseudo-scinetific drivel" after I changed my opinion to excuse my behaviour.


You keep getting the chronology wrong. Just should stick to the basic rationalization argument rather than get bogged down in these sort of excursions with me. Its perfectly possible the only reason I was susceptible to judge the "pseudo-scientifict drivel" as viable was because it made me feel good about either myself or the world. I'm not denying this.


I'll go a step further in the interests of being less wrong. I will change my opinion on the tenets of game if you provide proof of the following:

Men who think the world of their wives get cuckolded and divorced by a measurable lower rate than men who are accurate or overly negative in their assesment of their wives.

[DaShi]

Anyway... you don't seem to get it do you.


I changed how I behave after I changed my opinion on certain things after reading the "pseudo-scientifict drivel".

You keep getting the chronology wrong.

But you are the same. That's the problem. Anyway, this is the same drivel that Ben spills about religion. I don't waste anymore time on him, so I'm not wasting anymore on you.

[Heraclitus]

But you are the same. That's the problem.

As Ben or as I was before? Nevermind. I'm done with this conversation as well.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Playing the game may be wrong and may reward malice. But acknowledging the game is played is not rewarding malice. I do not confuse is with should. Deluding oneself about ones imagined virtue will only ****** any form of self correction!

So you are NOW trying to say that you don't think it should work as a game, but you are forced to do so because it always is?

Of course the people who haven't played games, yet are in long term fulfilling relationships don't count... or you have to redefine them as playing a "game", otherwise you have to acknowledge that you aren't forced to play a game to get a relationship.

Its not hacking a girls brain or tricking her, in fact Mystery (a respected PUA) specifically advised against lying for example, he als advised to ensure she is comfortable and glad to be around you, ect..

It isn't tricking a woman to act completely differently than how you usually act in order to get her? You have a different idea of the word "tricking".

Having confidence and being able to talk to people or make them laugh isn't a game. It's how you really are in social settings.

[Heraclitus]

So you are NOW trying to say that you don't think it should work as a game, but you are forced to do so because it always is?

Of course the people who haven't played games, yet are in long term fulfilling relationships don't count... or you have to redefine them as playing a "game", otherwise you have to acknowledge that you aren't forced to play a game to get a relationship.

Game isn't the alpha and the omega explanation for all relationships. It is however the explanation for over 95% of them and excuse me those seem fine odds to me.

It isn't tricking a woman to act completely differently than how you usually act in order to get her? You have a different idea of the word "tricking".

Isn't wearing a pushup bra or applying makeup or dying your hair or pretending to be interested in what he is saying an act?

lolz Buthex, fiat money and the mysandry buble indeed.

Having confidence and being able to talk to people or make them laugh isn't a game. It's how you really are in social settings.

These are called social skills. Game is a how to guide that gets you the socialization that people who suceed with women had. That is why every pick up artist worth his salt stresses that the game is played in the field and that everyone needs to test every assumption they have and figure out what works. They only provide the tips that work for the largest possible fraction of men for as many situations as possible on the most women as possible.

"Social Skills can be measured on about how you treat other people and how you react to them. It's a matter of dealing with the people around you. Different tests will help you to provide and tell what kind of personality you have towards others. If you are in doubt of your behavior, then you may be in touched with this kind of test. This would not help you totally, but this would serve as your guide in handling you personality towards the people whom your reacting with," (Ledesma, 2009).

[Imran Siddiqui]

Game isn't the alpha and the omega explanation for all relationships. It is however the explanation for over 95% of them and excuse me those seem fine odds to me.

And over 99% of relationships have nothing to do with game... see I can invent statistics too!!

Isn't wearing a pushup bra or applying makeup or dying your hair or pretending to be interested in what he is saying an act?

Are you seriously suggesting that looking your best on a date is akin to drastically altering your personality to pick up the opposite sex (and btw, yes, I share the same disdain for women who attempt to act more 'ditzy' to pick up men)?

Game is a how to guide that gets you the socialization that people who suceed with women had.

Translation: game is how to fake your personality so you can trick a woman into thinking you are a desirable guy.

Do you also think its alright to plow a woman with drinks so that her inhibition is lowered to the point where you seem to be an interesting and desirable mate?

[Gibsie]

You know I've read a bit on this game stuff and I always thought that the translation you gave was taken as a given. It's like applying managerial course terms to dating, you're not tricking them into thinking you're desirable, you're helping them realise what you have to offer. Or suppressing the negative parts of your personality to help bring out the beneficial parts, i.e. being a "better" person. Better of course being entirely subjective, but in terms of dating one method measuring success is how many ladies it gets you, so if the new style encouraged by the system works on that level, then you can understand why it might seem like a good thing to some.

I don't think it requires massive levels of misogyny per se, although some who are disillusioned with the usual process which essentially boils down to "women don't like me the way I am/the way I present myself" therefore "if I act in a certain way that is unlike me, I will have more success with women", which basically is saying that women don't like you. And you may have more success by acting in a manner that you would not actually like doing (E.g. the "neg"). And if acting in this manner is a success, I can see why it would lower someone's opinion of women. But it's still not a fair way of thinking.

I applied some principles from it a few years ago and was actually quite surprised by how some of the "tricks" worked. Remember, many of them boil down to what is natural "common sense", like, not acting needy. If you don't ever have poor interpersonal dealings, then of course it's going to sound like stupid advice... but if you need that advice and it helps, then that's not a bad thing. Well, it's better than just acting like mister speer has done in this thread. Like the texts he posted earlier, a normal person might go, "his response was a bit thick-headed, silly Albert, why didn't he just say something nice and get a better response? It's easy!" but the game reply is to analyse it and show "you missed this opportunity, you could have said this particular thing that would have gotten a better response and built her interest" etc. But at the end of the day you're both saying the same thing, just in different fashions.

I don't think alcohol is a popular method for the game students, as it's like playing on easy mode. While it is probably true that getting women drunk probably works very well, that's not what the game theory is about...