The 10 Biggest Mistakes Men Make with Women

[Trifin]

One of my goals is to be able to "pick up women", thats why I'm doing stronglifts (you'd think that if I was able to life 100 kg barbell overhead press, you'd think I'll be able to pick some women up, unless they're really heavy.... .

Joking aside......

The whole idea and wording "Pick UP Women", makes it sound like work.....I don't want to pick up women, sounds like hard work.

I think that pickup community is general good, but some people and mindset of it is in the wrong direction. There's no method.... no canned lines, that you need to learn , different type of openers, it just makes it too complicated. Meeting people (women and men), is about communicating and being ok with your self.

I believe, like , lifting weights, that you can go and find a good coach to help you along the way, and that's fine. It's just some of these "systems", are really really out of this world.

I understand, some the canned lines, like "Who do you think lies more men or women?" can be used at some circumstances, but It's just so weird, like , for example, If I was waiting in line at the coffee shop, and someone asked me that question, it would be akward. However, if that person, came up to me and just asked, "whats your favorite drink here", or maybe "hmm, you're in deep thought, what drink are you thinking about"

It just seems more natural ....

Just Rambling here...

Good point. Another thing to consider is that there are a lot of different schools of thought within the PU community. Anyone who lumps them all into the same group and says that "the pick up guys say this or that" has not done their homework and has probably never even read anything on pick up.

In all the stuff on PU I've read I've never once come across anything where they said to use a canned line. They may offer ideas on openers, but usually they'll qualify it by saying that you should adapt it to your own style, personality, and the person you're talking to. The main thing that I see that many of them teach is for guys to be in the moment and not think too much about lines. Your coffee shop example is a good one. You wouldn't use a canned line, but you might open with something similar that was adapted to the context of the environment. You've gotta be real with people. If someone's reading PU just so they can learn a bunch of canned lines and pre-rehearsed negs they're missing the point.

[Playboy]

If you want to get better with women, PU is a way to learn to relate, flirt with, connect and attract women. Whether it makes you happier or not depends on the person.

No, it's not on the person, despite my strong self-reliant streak that usually blames everything on the person.

The very nature of PU as a skill sets up a measuring stick that tells guys that unless they can connect, attract, and sleep with EVERY girl they find attractive then it's simply a matter of something he did to screw that up because PU is about skill (aka game).

Sleeping with a girl is not about skill. It's about mutual attraction, mutual expression of it, and the right situational conditions (or logistics). If any one of those is missing, then it doesn't happen.

PU says a man can control 2 out of three of those factors if not all three.

And that's what's wrong with it. A man cannot control it any more than she can. 1) He cannot control his attraction for her nor can he control her attraction to him (logic begs how can he control her attraction if he cannot control his own?). 2) He cannot control several logistics like his own relationship situation or hers, the fact they're both running late to work, or the fact her boss is watching. 3) And though he can seize control of his own expression of his desire for her, he cannot control her expression of her desire for him.

If a man manages to get a girl by doing things in the quest to become "attractive" that go against the very fiber of his character to get a girl (thereby manipulating her), it sets him up for failure and self-rejection because it wasn't the real him that got her and in order to keep her he has to keep being someone else. That keeps him unhappy lest he have no real identity of his own.

Contrary to popular belief, self-acceptance does not preclude improvement in realistically quantifiable ways. If I want to get better at drawing, I simply need to draw more. I don't need to change the way I dress or the way I squint my eyes. I don't need to do any push-pull. I simply draw more. If I want success with women, I simply proposition more women I find attractive. I don't have to tell a girl she's my bratty little sister or wear super-tight $100 jeans. When, as a result of my actions, I find myself in more relationships than I was in before I started down my course, I am a success.

The PU community does not provide realistic ways for the reasons enumerated above. It proclaims all women are gettable when they are not. It also proclaims that a guy is unattractive to start with and has to become attractive to get women. When a guy fails to get one girl, he blames himself for doing the wrong thing. Yet when we look at what the community calls "naturals" they are as varied as normal "AFCs" in background, looks, and personality. The only thing that differs is that naturals are not afraid to express genuine desire.

If all the PU community did was teach guys to express their desires (through flirting, speaking plainly, nonverbally), and were honest that while they'd get with more girls than they did before by taking the initiative but not all the women they wanted, I'd be for it. But in telling men that they're not attractive and have to become attractive to get women and that they'll only be attractive only after attracting ALL women through game ensures guys will never have any real self-confidence because women are attracted to different things, which cause guys in the PUC to have fragmented identities in order to conform to varying tastes of various women.

That's probably a nice thought in theory but that's not how it works in real life. Have you ever met a PUG? It's all real. They won't get 100% of women, but I'm seriously not kidding when I say they get at least 90%. You don't know enough about the community to talk really. Let me guess, you read the game , and nothing else right? There are SO many different sides of pickup, and a lot of PUGs focus on just what you said you think they should. Actually, all of them do. Mystery teaches you to flirt, but he does so SYSTEMATICALLY. To learn something, you need to know the details. David DeAngelo is one of the most popular PUGs and he's a bit more "down to earth" then say, mystery (which is why he makes a shitload of more money too). If you tape two persons flirting there's both CnF and Push-Pull going on ALL the time. IT'S NATURAL.

[Mehdi]

What's so wrong with pick-up, game, seduction, or any of that shit if it's fun and you enjoy it? As long as you don't make it your goal in life. I don't see any harm in being open to advice from others who have been successful with women. From what I've read in the PUA stuff most of them never say what people accuse them of. Yeah, there's a lot of bullshit out there, but there's also some good things about building self-esteem, confidence, and overcoming insecurity. Hey, if it works for ya I say more power to ya....

What is wrong with doing isolation exercises 6x/week if it's fun and you enjoy it? Nothing. But don't complain if other guys are getting more results because they did the hard work: building a foundation of strength, compound exercises, eating correctly, getting their mindset right, ...

It's the same thing. PUA is band-aid. It doesn't go deeper. Even the newer stuff that focuses on inner-game still takes the point of view that you have to become the women's ideal. Goes against self-acceptance, not caring, ...

You'll get a lot more results with any pua stuff when you've done the work on yourself first. But guys will rather go out 6 nights/week and acting like clowns doing cologne openers all night than doing that.

If one is OK with oneself the way one is that means that person has no reason for self-improvement. They will just sit around being lazy telling themself they are great the way they are.

A society full of people "happy with themselves the way they are":
A. Does not exist now and never has. An essential part of the human condition is conceiving of an ideal man and measuring oneself against that ideal.
B. Would die a quick death. This society would have no motivation to do anything but fullfill the basest human desires. With nothing to aspire to, the people would quickly resort to violence, hedonism, and general primitive behavior. And they would not be happy.

The only way to happiness is through the self-actualization created by bringing oneself closer to one's Ideal Man.

If part of your image of the Ideal Man is one who is wanted by and can pick up women with ease; then, learning game would make that one a happier person. If not it will not.

You're thinking in extremes. Nothing wrong with self-actualization, but not at the cost of lack of self-acceptance. Lack of self-acceptance: thinking about what you say all the time in order not to screw the interaction (which ironically screws it up because women want someone who is present), stressing about the fact that your nose points a bit more to the right than the left, ....

I think we're drifting away from the topic of discussion here. I understand how you're saying that if you want to be better at picking up women because you think not being able to pick up women is something that's "wrong" with you, I kind of get that. And I disagree with you. I used to think there was something wrong with me because I sucked with women, and guess what getting better with women has filled that hole, as has it for many others. If you have other issues, yes pick-up won't solve them, but for most people realizing that they can actually pick up women if they want to gives them an epiphany, it's kind of like "There was nothing wrong with ME. I just had some bad habits. This means there's really nothing wrong with me in every area of my life, I am perfect just the way I am, I can be anything!". Of course no one in this topic arguing against pickup seems to have had any personal breakdowns because of lack of success with women, so I'm pretty sure you can't relate to this.

Anyways, it's getting off topic. Pick-up doesn't claim to make you happy, it claims to get you women. Saying people shouldn't do pickup because it won't solve their deep problems is like saying people shouldn't work out for the exact same reason. If you want to get better with women, PU is a way to learn to relate, flirt with, connect and attract women. Whether it makes you happier or not depends on the person.

Pick-up doesn't make the claim, but exploits the fact that people think a woman (or a man for women) will make them happy. You already know how to deal with women. Remember when you were a kid and you were playing in the sandbox. You could do it. And a big reason is because you weren't making such a big deal out of this in the first place. Women were not your priority at all back then.

This was posted on another forum. It is not a misogynist stuff, neither does it mean you have to stay single. It's anti-pua, that idea that you have to be successful with women that keeps being spread by PUA.

FUCK PURSUING

I'm done with it.
I'm done with trying to catch a girls eyes.
I'm done with staring at a girl hoping she will look at me and smiling like a douche when she sees me looking at her.
I'm done walking into rooms and scanning for hot chicks.
I'm done caring about how hot a girl is.
I'm done caring that my friends are more successful with chicks than I am.
I'm done feeling jealous of guys I see with hot girls.
I'm done with trying to think of "clever" shit to say to impress girls.
I'm done asking girls on dates...fuck dating!
I'm done calling and texting and e-mailing girls when I get bored.
I'm done feeling like a loser just because I have never had a serious girlfriend...who really gives a fuck?
I'm done feeling like a loser just because I have only slept with 3 girls...who gives a fuck?
I'm done listening to woman-advice from guys who got married when they were 22!
I might not ever sleep with another girl again, but I just don't give a fuck anymore. Pursuing is bullshit!

FUCK PURSUING!

That's probably a nice thought in theory but that's not how it works in real life. Have you ever met a PUG? It's all real. They won't get 100% of women, but I'm seriously not kidding when I say they get at least 90%. You don't know enough about the community to talk really. Let me guess, you read the game , and nothing else right? There are SO many different sides of pickup, and a lot of PUGs focus on just what you said you think they should. Actually, all of them do. Mystery teaches you to flirt, but he does so SYSTEMATICALLY. To learn something, you need to know the details. David DeAngelo is one of the most popular PUGs and he's a bit more "down to earth" then say, mystery (which is why he makes a shitload of more money too). If you tape two persons flirting there's both CnF and Push-Pull going on ALL the time. IT'S NATURAL.

I know the community. I wrote I've gone out with PUAs - including coaches - several times and I've seen fucked up things. Now it could be that the PUAs in my country are fucked up, so I don't have a good overview. But when I read what some guys are posting here, and who happen to be from other countries than mine, I recognize the same behavior.

Especially how young/inexperienced guys who just get into the community (like you Playboy - tough love) have this general stubborness and unwillingness to listen to different point of views coming from guys with more experience. It's like before someone told you to stop buying flowers & dinners and you wouldn't listen because you were under social conditioning. And now someone tells you should stop with that endless pursuing, but you don't want to because you're under PUA conditioning. That's how much you've evolved.

Actually, Tyler Durden says that somewhere, I think it was in Blueprint, that many guys go full circle. They go from social conditioning to pua conditioning and then back to where they started. Tyler Durden happens to be one of the rare guy it seems in the PUA community to have a long-term relationship and a child coming up. He seems to have his stuff together, although in the game seemed (and I think he admitted it later on) to be pretty fucked up earlier on. Maybe that's why he's moving to personal growth products.

There aren't many guys who have something serious. David X is married for years but he's anti-pua. David Deida is married, but he's not from pua community. Johnny Soporno has somethig somewhat serious, but he's also not really pua. Think about all those PUAs who are single (DD, mystery, brent smith, ...) and what the reason for that could be - especially if it's true they have so much skills & choice. Is it because they dont want something serious, because they can't find what they want although they have so much choice, or is it because the game screwed them up? Then ask yourself: what is your goal, and how does that fit with the PUA's your listening to.

Here's Alex Allman, from DVD11 of DYD's Man Transformation. Most important video you'll watch related to PUA. Watch the follow up videos.

[Trifin]

Mehdi, I think you have a lot of really strong points, and I agree with you on most of them. However, where you mentioned the guys who teach pick-up who are married or in a LTR vs. the guys like Mystery who are single it got me to thinking: While I respect people who've been able to keep a relationship or marriage together for a long time, it may not be every guy's main priority. Especially young single guys in their 20's like myself who have other priorities and work hard at reaching them before they're ready to "settle down". One of the things that some of the materials I've read on PU have done for me is open my mind to the possibility of just going out, dating cool, interesting, hot single women and not having to feel like because I don't fit into some traditional ideal of society that I'm somehow wrong.

Marriage, true-love, relationships, etc are all wonderful things that I don't doubt I'll possibly get to experience one day, but in the meantime I'm going to live my life in the moment and enjoy myself. That doesn't mean that I have "commitment" issues or anything. It just means that what works others may not work for me at this point in my life, and I'm comfortable with that.

[Mehdi]

@Trifin
Guys in PUA community who I've talked to, always give me the same goals for getting into that:
A. Choice
B. Finding 1 great girl

Choice pulls you into the mindset that you're not good enough and that you have to keep improving your skills. It also creates this illusion that you can control things, which you can't (Rara explained this). Finally: the real reason they want choice is to find that 1 great girl.

I know guys who do not want to get into a relationship. One common reason I hear: they want to make up for the years they "wasted" (feel sorry for that). Another reason I hear is what you're saying: lack of time. I don't agree with that neither. I think it's fear of commitment. If it turns out you don't have time, you can always end the relationship later on. By avoiding it, you'll never know. I think the right woman can actually make it easier to achieve your goals, assuming she's supportive and brings stability in your life.

I don't say you have to be in a relationship. What I mean is that you better don't control this stuff and let it happen organically. That's my problem with Brent's stuff: I feel the way he does things, is to stay on purpose single. He's too extreme with the not pursuing. If that's what you really want, great. But I don't think that's what most guys really want. And those who think they do, they don't want it once they got it. Because you get bored of everything, including choice.

Attraction
In recent years a great deal of material has been created to explain how to attract a relationship partner. Some of it is technique-based, while much of it encourages you to develop the inner qualities a potential partner would find attractive.

I do think this material can be helpful for many people, especially since a great deal of it overlaps with general principles of personal development.

However, a huge amount of relationship material is rooted in a mindset that I don’t agree with — that you must first change something about yourself in order to become worthy of attracting a really great relationship partner. This mindset pre-supposes that for whatever reason, you aren’t yet capable of attracting that partner in this particular moment. This is a tricky mindset. I won’t say it’s exactly wrong, but I think it’s missing the big picture.

Let me offer you an alternative way of thinking about attraction.

A while back I wrote an article called Self-Acceptance vs. Personal Growth, which is about how to make positive changes while at the same time accepting yourself just as you are. Don’t begin with the erroneous assumption that you’re somehow defective.

This is a good way to think about attraction as well. Attraction occurs very naturally. Instead of learning techniques and “inner game” to become attractive, I think it’s more accurate to say that we need to learn how to stop blocking attraction when it naturally arises. You are already attractive. You just need to realize that and stop blocking yourself from expressing your natural attractiveness.

How many animal species hold seminars to teach their members how to attract a mate? They don’t need anything like that because they don’t have our level of social conditioning that tells them they’re ugly and unattractive and need to be repaired before they’re worthy. They just drop for it in the bushes and then go back to foraging.

Natural Attraction
Instead of trying to diagnose what you need to change or fix about yourself in order to attract a desirable partner, look at it from the opposite perspective. What sort of people do you find naturally attractive?

I’m going to suggest that the people you find naturally attractive are the same people that can help stimulate massive positive changes within you. Even if it doesn’t logically seem like a great match, such partners can potentially be very good for you — not always, but quite often.

When Erin and I first met, we naturally attracted each other. We didn’t need to use tricks and techniques, and we didn’t need to develop our inner qualities either. We certainly weren’t masters of social dynamics, but it didn’t matter. We allowed the attraction to unfold naturally. And 15 years later, we’re still great matches for each other.

Now don’t get me wrong. I think there’s a lot of value to be gained from improving your social skills as well as doing things that make you feel more attractive, especially on the inside. But I would also suggest that entering in a new relationship with someone is one of the best ways to grow and improve.

Instead of thinking about what you should change about yourself in order to gain a relationship, think in the opposite direction. How might a new relationship help you create all those changes? A relationship isn’t an end goal. It’s yet another pathway to long-term growth.

We’re all imbalanced beings to one degree or another. That’s perfectly okay. Don’t think of your personality quirks as defects you must repair. Ironically those quirks may be exactly what someone else finds most attractive about you.

The nice thing about improving through a relationship (as opposed to improving for a relationship) is that you get to enjoy life with your very best personal coach at your side. Instead of growing to get the relationship, you experience growth because of the relationship.

http://www.stevepavlina.com/blog/2009/05/attraction/

Read also Self-acceptance vs. Personal growth: http://www.stevepavlina.com/blog/2006/0 ... al-growth/

[Playboy]

I mentioned Alex Allmann already. You've checked out AMP right? I might seem stubborn now but I actually think we mostly agree, I think techniques are needed on TOP of everything else if you want perfect success. Basically this is my train of thought, think of this as a holarcic circle, the first point is the core principle, and the others build on top of that:

1. Deep Inner game (Self-acceptance, prescence, integrity, confidence, interest in other people)
2. Outer game (building good habits when it comes to flirting, getting phone numbers, approaching girls, body language, and I think having interesting hobbies and an interesting life goes under this).
3. Physical Attraction (We're allow shallow, it's time to accept that. It's nice and all that in an ideal society we wouldn't judge people based on looks, but everyone still does. Physical fitness (the adonis index more specifically IMO), grooming and dressing decently plays a huge role here)

Deep inner game is most important both for attraction and happiness, but neglecting any of the three is simply stupid.

But as you said I'm still young and I've got things to learn, maybe I'll get an epiphany some day. I've got the impression that when you try something out, you stick with it until you get it down, THEN you evaluate the results. Giving up on pickup now because some guys tell me it won't give me anything isn't logical, because I haven't mastered it yet. If I think like that I'll go around endlessly pursuing things I don't see through, that's not good for your integrity. Also, as you said yourself in your ebook Mehdi it's better to try things out for yourself. So far, it's working better then not doing pickup. I've never been in a relationship anyways and now I'm closer then ever (though I've had a bunch of ONS since I started).

The PUGs I've met in Norway are very varied, some of them are just robots (the most famous one IMO is), but a lot of the others are really there when it comes to just "Living it". Some guys are just socially awkward and view most people as objects, a lot of those are attracted to pick-up.

[tenkev]

If one is OK with oneself the way one is that means that person has no reason for self-improvement. They will just sit around being lazy telling themself they are great the way they are.

A society full of people "happy with themselves the way they are":
A. Does not exist now and never has. An essential part of the human condition is conceiving of an ideal man and measuring oneself against that ideal.
B. Would die a quick death. This society would have no motivation to do anything but fullfill the basest human desires. With nothing to aspire to, the people would quickly resort to violence, hedonism, and general primitive behavior. And they would not be happy.

The only way to happiness is through the self-actualization created by bringing oneself closer to one's Ideal Man.

If part of your image of the Ideal Man is one who is wanted by and can pick up women with ease; then, learning game would make that one a happier person. If not it will not.

You're thinking in extremes. Nothing wrong with self-actualization, but not at the cost of lack of self-acceptance. Lack of self-acceptance: thinking about what you say all the time in order not to screw the interaction (which ironically screws it up because women want someone who is present), stressing about the fact that your nose points a bit more to the right than the left, ....

I was making a more general point, not about picking up women. I agree that self-confidence/self-acceptance/aloofness makes one better at picking up women; but, I wholeheartedly disagree with the notion that people should just "accept themselves the way they are." Should a child rapist just accept himself the way he is, or should he realize that the things he does makes him a bad person and aspire to do/be better? Should a morbidly obese person just accept himself the way he is or should he realize he is killing himself and wasting his one and only life and aspire to be a better person? Actively working to better oneself or further a cause are the only ways to lasting happiness.

[Mehdi]

Haven't watched any material from AMP. I heard Alex Allmann's in Man Transformation, and I've read their stuff is heavily inspired by David Deida's stuff. Like I said: I don't like putting too much material in my head, it tends to make you lose your presence, which is counter-productive.

Purpose is the most important thing for a man. Purpose will fix most of the issues guys have. A purpose is some goal, something big, that isn't women. Could be lifting, could be work, could be some hobby you get into. Something. You'll be busy, you'll have a sense of direction in life, you'll stop being needy, ...

Couple of examples of how having a purpose fixes a lot:
* Guys are often needy because they're bored. They don't know what to do, so they count on a woman to entertain them. That's when they start doing the endless texting and whatever. But women usually want a guy who is a challenge, not very accessible, who they can miss, etc.
* PUA will tell you to fake the above by waiting x days before messaging them, by only seeing them 2-3x/week, by ending dates short, by ending conversation first, ... All of that can work, but it's fake. And sooner or later, especially if you end up in a relationship, they'll see through it. Because you haven't dealt with the underlying issue, which is to have a purpose.
* If you have a purpose, something that really keeps you busy, you don't have to fake all the above. You don't have to do it. You are it. That's the different between doing & being.
* It also stops that awful stuff like AIMing, telling your whole life through text messages before you see her, phone calls of 3 hours, and all that other crap, because you have something to do that's more important than her.
* It also raises your confidence because you're getting really good at something.

The biggest complain I hear from guys whose relationship ended, is this: "I did everything she wanted me to do, and she left". Well that's your fault. Why did you listen to her? A woman will want you to stop training and all of that. And when you do it, she leaves you. Why? Because she was attracted to that in the first place. Why did you change what she was attracted to you? It's your fault. What she says she wants is not what she wants.

Now of course this is the hard stuff: finding a purpose, how do you do that. You want to know my purpose? My work. Before that: lifting. Some guys will skip their training to go see some girl. I will never, ever do that, I don't care who's asking. Same thing with work. And women can give you crap for this for a while, but they'll get over it if you stand your ground, do make time for her, and give you them your full attention when you're with them (not listening to them while watching tv, shut down tv and listen). If not: you're better off without her. Of course most guys fear loss, they think she's the one and all that crap or think they have no options and are afraid to lose her if they stand ground.

All that other stuff like fear of approaching can be dealt later on, but this really should be the basics: finding a purpose.

[tenkev]

OK, well you just basically said the same thing I was trying to say to you. I guess we agree.

[pagangoddess]

The biggest complain I hear from guys whose relationship ended, is this: "I did everything she wanted me to do, and she left". Well that's your fault. Why did you listen to her? A woman will want you to stop training and all of that. And when you do it, she leaves you. Why? Because she was attracted to that in the first place. Why did you change what she was attracted to you? It's your fault.

I have to disagree with you on this one. Women are responsible in that also. It's stupid for a woman to put all kinds of pressure on a man to change & then once that change occurs to leave. The man is not completely to blame. The way I see it is if I love/care about someone I want them to fulfill their purpose not give it up for me. Changing someone is not what I consider partnership. Yes I would encourage that person to better themselves but that's not the kind of change we're taking about.

What she says she wants is not what she wants.

Which is completely unfair to men. Women should be forthcoming & honest. Don't say it if you don't mean it. Men aren't mind readers.

[Trifin]

BTW Mehdi, I just picked up David Deida's book "Way of the Superior Man" at your recommendation. There's some good stuff in there once you get passed the new age double-speak. Thanks for the heads-up...

[Rara]

If flirting, CnF, and push-pull are natural as you said, why bother teaching it? It's like trying to teach a guy how to get an erection. When he's genuinely turned on and in the moment, it happens. But the more he tries to get one, the harder it becomes for him to get one. If flirting and erections happen naturally (and we both agree they do), it doesn't need to be taught at all and can't be. But to say it can and needs to be taught implies it's not natural. A photocopy is not the same as the original.

Your 90% claim is ambiguous. The only way that claim holds water is if you mean "point out 10 hot women, and gurus will sleep with 9 of them within a certain time frame." And if you do, you have to have proof to back it up. Anything else is false advertising.

But lets assume it works and you sleep with 90% of women you find attractive on a physical and "status" level. Do you want 90% of that female population? Yeah, you can sleep with Jessica Alba, but what if she just lies there?

Do you blame her for being bad in bed or do you try to "learn" how to be better in bed by awaking her inner tiger through skills taught in some ebook?

If you try to learn skills to make her more active and get rid of your likes in bed to favor hers, at what point do you judge her incompatible with your life? The nature of "choice" implies judging others as not being good enough for you. If you keep faulting yourself, there's no real choices being made because you never turn girls down for not being good enough for you. At what point do you stop blaming yourself? At what point do you stop doing for her and start doing for yourself?

And if you blame her for being bad in bed or incompatible with your kinks (by virtue of only being active when doing what she likes not what you naturally like), why do you not do the same when you still have your clothes on and find she only wants you when you're trying to build/maintain attraction by saying and doing things that don't come to you naturally?

[Playboy]

If flirting, CnF, and push-pull are natural as you said, why bother teaching it? It's like trying to teach a guy how to get an erection. When he's genuinely turned on and in the moment, it happens. But the more he tries to get one, the harder it becomes for him to get one. If flirting and erections happen naturally (and we both agree they do), it doesn't need to be taught at all and can't be. But to say it can and needs to be taught implies it's not natural. A photocopy is not the same as the original.

Your 90% claim is ambiguous. The only way that claim holds water is if you mean "point out 10 hot women, and gurus will sleep with 9 of them within a certain time frame." And if you do, you have to have proof to back it up. Anything else is false advertising.

But lets assume it works and you sleep with 90% of women you find attractive on a physical and "status" level. Do you want 90% of that female population? Yeah, you can sleep with Jessica Alba, but what if she just lies there?

Do you blame her for being bad in bed or do you try to "learn" how to be better in bed by awaking her inner tiger through skills taught in some ebook?

If you try to learn skills to make her more active and get rid of your likes in bed to favor hers, at what point do you judge her incompatible with your life? The nature of "choice" implies judging others as not being good enough for you. If you keep faulting yourself, there's no real choices being made because you never turn girls down for not being good enough for you. At what point do you stop blaming yourself? At what point do you stop doing for her and start doing for yourself?

And if you blame her for being bad in bed or incompatible with your kinks (by virtue of only being active when doing what she likes not what you naturally like), why do you not do the same when you still have your clothes on and find she only wants you when you're trying to build/maintain attraction by saying and doing things that don't come to you naturally?

Did you read my entire post? I think you're already pretty certain what my opinion is and what you want to post. Take 5 minutes, read my post again, and you'll see that your reply is a bit off. I agree with not being a social robot, analyze my holarcic model. I said pick up skills should BUILD on an already core-confident person (basically everything everyone has said about being comfortable with oneself). And to answer one of your questions, pick-up is all for myself. If a girl is bitchy, she can fuck off, she's missing out on a great experience. That's a key message in all PU. However believe it or not most girls are actually wonderfull people, they're just tired of guys who try to buy their affection to get sex or manipulate them by being fake (This is what nice guys do). PU is about relating, flirting, and being yourself, as I said before.

CnF and Push-Pull is natural, TO NATURALS. Just like some people have talent in certain sports, learning language, maths, persuasion, etc etc etc. I'm a psych major, and believe it or not but research strongly points to the way that most people are born with a specific personality, unable to change it unless they're strongly affected by either their parents or peers (which is unlikely to happen, since their parents most likely gave them their genes). You're not BORN cocky funny, but you're born with a preset mindset of either fearlessness or insecurity. Usually, this means you're deathly afraid of failure, which causes the nice-guy attitude. If Jessica Alba and me didn't work out in bed, I'd find a way for us to work together that we both enjoyed.

And Mehdi, AMP pretty much embodies what you said about being present. Heck, the three pieces they have are called "Power of Presence", "Power of Appreciation" and "Power of Integrity". They say that every single "outer game" technique you learn takes you further from your true authentic potential, to me they have the best program of all. But that doesn't mean pick-up skills are useless. They're expensive though, but pretty easy to find online as well.

[Trifin]

Yeah, you can sleep with Jessica Alba, but what if she just lies there?

I highly doubt this would be an issue with her!

[Trifin]

If flirting, CnF, and push-pull are natural as you said, why bother teaching it? It's like trying to teach a guy how to get an erection. When he's genuinely turned on and in the moment, it happens. But the more he tries to get one, the harder it becomes for him to get one. If flirting and erections happen naturally (and we both agree they do), it doesn't need to be taught at all and can't be. But to say it can and needs to be taught implies it's not natural. A photocopy is not the same as the original?

Dude, c'mon: Flirting is no more natural than squatting 1.5x BW is. Can you be any more arrogant? It may come easier for some based on their experience or personality, but flirting not natural. It's a game. Before I found out about C&F , negs, etc, I never once flirted with any girl because it didn't feel natural to me. I got laid in spite of myself. What most guys call "getting lucky". I used to make fun of guys who flirted thinking they were shallow and phony. Maybe they were, but they got laid.

What about people who live in countries where they have arranged marriages? Is flirting natural for them? I think not.