The Top Pickup Artist Forum On The Internet: Fast Seduction 101

Home | 


mASF post by zarathustra_fi

<< Home ... < Relevance Matches ... "amogs"

You can search for more articles and discussions like this on the rest of this web site.

Acronyms used in this article can be looked up on the acronyms page.  To get involved in discussions like this, you can join the mASF discussion forum at [posts in this section may be edited, but only for spelling corrections and readability]

mASF post by "zarathustra_fi"
posted on: mASF forum: Advanced Discussion, July 7, 2005

On 7/7/05 10:02:00 AM, Moonwalker wrote:

Very good post Moonwalker, this is called PACE and LEAD in NLP. Sometimes
simple things are great things.

When one puts this in practice in the field he will be simply amazed in
noticing how women can be turned around.

Something which seems to be from them as "very assertive" at first sight is
actually changed into what the guy wants as soon as she is paced on what she
was telling and later led on.

I think women are much weaker to fall for this when it is used on them than men
because they value a lot HARMONY of the communication. ( read Hitori's
wonderful post about this )

This works also gold in LTRs. Never argue with a woman: simply pace her and
then lead. You will notice that what seemed to be a iron wall built by her was
actually a butterfly.

Men are much less likely to fall for this because they don't give a shit about
harmony of the communication.

Online Seduction School for Single Men, Husbands & Players

"Sarge Est Necesse, Vivere Necesse Non Est " Gnaeus Pompeius, revised
>This is something really fun
>and valuable. It's a model to
>reframe a negative remark of
>the person in front of you
>into your own positive idea.
>It's used a lot in sales and
>It's the 'yes-and' method.
>It's a 2 step re framing
>trick. It consists of a
>'yes'step (step 1) and an
>'and' step (step 2).
>Target: No, blabla xyz [some
>negative statement]
>You(STEP 1): Yes, I totally
>agree with xyz, you are
>absolutely right when you say
>You(STEP 2): AND on top of
>that I could add abc [the
>opposite of xyz in other
>STEP1: this is were you
>totally agree with your
>target. This has two functions
>1- to surprise your target.
>target doesn't expect you to
>agree, but instead expect you
>to go against his or her
>negative statement. You don't
>and therefore you surprise the
>target. This unexpectedness
>creates attraction, respect
>and curiosity. the 2nd
>function of step 1 is that you
>agree with the target and
>therefore you make RAPPORT
>with the target instead of
>breaking it. So suddenly you
>are on the same side as the
>target. You agree with the
>target and therefore the
>target is suddenly inmensly
>more suggestible to whatever
>you say next. Whereas when you
>oppose your target you'll only
>break rapport and target will
>never be open to what you have
>to say.
>STEP2: now you created this
>space, suggestibility and
>rapport you can whatever y ou
>want but DONT' start step to
>with 'but'. Start it with AND.
>Because if you are saying like
>'i totally agree with you BUT
>I actually disagree with you',
>target will be trigger by the
>word 'but' and expects and
>opposing statement after
>'but'. If you use the linker
>'and' instead of 'but', the
>listener in front of you will
>hear your statement as
>something 'added' to you
>agreeing with them. The
>listener will not expect you
>opposing him or her and will
>therefore not resist your
>Example 1:
>PUA(step1); Yes can't kiss me
>PUA(step2): .. and imagine
>that you would kiss me right
>Example 2:
>Target: I can't go home with
>you because i have to get up
>early tommorw
>PUA(step1): so yes i can't go
>home with you
>PUA(step2): .. and imagine
>that you would fall asleep in
>my arms
>It also works very good with
>AMOGS... don't oppose them,
>but instead just agree with
>them... They won't expect that
>and makes a fool of them
>Example 3:
>AMOG: You are a
>PUA(step1): yes you are right,
>i'm a retard
>PUA(step2): AND if you excuse
>Example 4 (typical sales
>TARGET: I don't want to
>subscribe to anything because
>I don't want to feel attached
>to any extra responsibilities.
>es away the barrier): yes i
>understand a agree that you
>are not subscribing to
>anything because you don't
>want to feel attached to any
>extra responsibilities.
>TARGET: Yes indeed.
>SALESMAN:(step2->now you have
>space again->continue
>selling)and now you DO like
>the advantages of what i'm
>offering you, and I could make
>you enjoy these possibilities
>with you having to attach to
>anything. So you can at all
>times feel free blablabla.
>moo***r@nl***[ ? ]
>Moderator of the dutch

Unless otherwise noted, this article is Copyright©2005 by "zarathustra_fi" with implicit permission provided to for reproduction. Any other use is prohibited without the explicit permission of the original author.


 Learn The Skills StoreStore