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

Home | 

Re: Perception of intent...

mASF post by spirit

<< Home ... < Relevance Matches ... "mysterys lounge"

Re: Perception of intent...
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 "spirit"
posted on: mASF forum: General Discussion newsgroup, February 2, 2002

Well after 40hours awake and 15 asleep, I think I`m just about ready to
reply to this =o)

Comments below,

"The best man in the world and a good enough man for any world" - R.Chandler

<toecutter> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> Spirit, this is good. You are a man along my lines of thinking. Let me add
> some input:
> <spirit> wrote in message
> > 1 Opening / Approaching / Fluffing
> >
> > What is the intention behind this part of a PU? Whatever method I use
> > do this, for me it is getting my `foot in the door` I intend to do /
> > something which will allow me to continue seducing a HB - or, if you
> > something that will enable me to spend more time with this HB.
> Agreed. However I hate the term "fluff". The openening section is too
> important to be relying on "fluff". You need interesting routines for
this. I
> will re-post something from Mysterys lounge shortly on my thoughts about
> vs. NLP that goes into this interesting routines thing.

Agreed - and I also I hate the term fluff. It was just grouped in with the
others as it`s something alot of people refer to in or around this stage of
a PU.

Whilst I appreciate the importance of having a `routine` to fall back on
it`s just not my preferred way of working.

> > 2. Eliciting Values
> I know this is controversial, but consider DROPPING eliciting values from
> game. What do they do for you?

Personally I find that EVing someone helps me alter my PU to make it more
attractive to them.

> Here is where I am going to go against the
> common wisdom:
> Drop rapport!
> Drop eliciting values!
> Drop submodalities!
> These are all BORING CONVERSATIONS. Like that "What qualities do you find
> imporant about a man?" routine. It is so bad. Then when you go "And what
> a guy with a good sense of humour give you?". Man this is really bad. And
> is going "I dont know" and you are going "But if you did know" and she is
> going "what do you want from me?" How is this interesting to her? Why is
> speaking back to you? How have you captured her attention and made her
> intregued? See I dont even understand what you would then do with the
> information gleaned, because then trying to demonstrate each of those
> charicteristics or making sure she feels each of the criterea is a SELLING
> MODEL based on LOGIC. As if she is going to realise through logic that
> are my criterea and this BORING FUCKING GUY asking BORING FUCKING
> actually my perfect man. I have asked every SSer I have ever met how to
> this an entertaining routine, and some of them tell me that you should
> qualities about sex, but it doesn't work for me. I put it to you that this
> routine SUCKS. I put it to you that chasing rapport is supplicating. Not
> alpha trait. We need to question conventional wisdom here. I find these
> unworkable routines. Certainly no good for groups and definately highly
> questionable for one on one also.

Agreed - on their own they are all boring conversations. Except that I
don`t use any of these tools in isolation or for any set length of time or
necessarily use them and so on. If we assume that it is a selling model
based on logic it doesn`t follow that it has to be presented to the HB as a
logic based model or routine.

I don`t PU according to any fixed model or set of stages to go through in my
mind - I`m aware of all the tools I have a my disposal (EV, Weasel phrase,
Submodalities, Humour etc ) and will use these as appropriate - assuming
that I did use all the options avaiable to me then they would be woven into
the PU.

I don`t EV her as a stage - but every single thing she says will be
`processed` , analysed for value staements etc and then fed back either
there and then or later on - the important thing is that I have the info
stored away to use whenever I want, for whatever reasn I want.

I agree CHASING rapport sucks and is supplicating.

Having said that rapport is a very useful thing to have. If we are in
rapport with someone they`re more likely to do things we want them to - but
we don`t have to chase rapport. We can `help` them to see that they`re more
like us and we won`t lose any `alphaness` by saying "hey! I dunk biscuits in
my coffee too" You can be strong and still have similarities with other

> NLP is an analytical tool designed for therapy. The value in NLP terms of
> value elicitation is clear. But NLP has limitations. And those limitations
> that it is not particularly interesting.

Who cares what it was designed for? I only care about using parts of it for
my own ends. NLP in a text book may be uninteresting or NLP as a therapy
tool taken straight onto the street with no changes in it`s delivery may be
uninteresting... but we don`t do that ( do we? lol )

> In fact, the point is to be
> uninteresting to the conscious mind so that we can communicate with the
> unconsious.

Depending on how NLP is used i.e. in therapy then I agree.

In a PU however we wrap aspects of NLP up in an interesting / entertaining
package and this is why I used the dual process model to help in my
explanation. Ideally we want her thinking in a heuristic mode - we don`t
want her systematically processing the situation at hand - we want her to be
glossing over the majority of it, getting carried away if you will... If
she`s not paying full attention to everything then we can sneak past her
conscious and get to the subconscious.

It`s not that it is uninteresting to the conscious mind that NLP works, it`s
the fact that it`s alot easier to be uninteresting with people in general
than it is to be interesting. Uninteresting in therapy is just an easier way
of diverting the subjects conscious mind.

Being interesting, or engaging whatever in a PU is just another way of
diverting the HB`s conscious / systematic mind.

> That is what confusion induction is all about. All well and good
> in therapy. But the PU Arts are largely in entertainment. In this case it
> important to be interesting. Now, I can use NLP and still be interesting.
> can be telling a story and say "So there she was and she knew the guy was
> looking at her, and you know how it feels when you have a foreign guy
> at you from afar. And he lets his eyes wander, and you know he is eyes are
> exploring your face (as you explore her face with your eyes) and wander
> to your neck (as look at her neck), and you are enjoying it, and down to
> body (as you move your eyes back to her eyes) as he is undressing you with
> eyes. And you feel your heart starting to race as you realise you are
> aroused. So that is what was going through this chicks mind as she sat
> ...." See what I mean about interesting vs. not interesting, and how you
> use NLP as a tool and spark her interest and attention, and you can use
NLP as
> a tool and ask difficult questions that she is not interested in
> I've run that routine maybe 100 times and then threw it away because it is
> garbage. See the re-post I am about to post.
> >
> > OK, during this part of a PU my primary intention is not to lay the
> > My primary intention (i.e. the one displayed more prominently or
> > easier to perceive) is to find stuff out about her... This `stage`
> > all the others!) relies on control of the conversation on your part, in
> > however ( H or S ) she is thinking we want it to be about something (
> > anything!) other than the real reason we are still talking to her.
> I think you can not ask any questions that are too personal at this stage
> it begs the question "who the fuck are you with your 20 questions?

As I said earlier I don`t think in stages during a PU. If I think I can get
away with it I`ll ask anything I want with the proviso that it`ll be woven
into the conversation.

Your hypothetical statement above shows exactly the wrong way to EV someone
if you`re asking 20 questions then your PU method sucks for a couple of

"who the fuck are you with your 20 questions?"

This would suggest that:

You have just asked one too many questions in succession
Furthermore these questions were not really part of the conversation.
You have allowed her to SYSTEMATICALY think about the fact you have just
asked a bundle of questions
Your questions were `wrong` they didn`t engage her fully.
and so on...

>What are
> you trying to sell me here?
> What is this, am I a contestant on Jeopardy and
> this is the intro where they say "and Karen is into Pressing Flowers ...
> many pressed flowers do you have, Karen? And how do pressed flowers make
> feel?"

The above examples show the mental processes of someone who is thinking
systematically about something.

> If you have seen your first IOI (ie. she has asked you your name, consider
> SHARING something about yourself at this point ... "I have just come home
> North America where I spent more than 5 years ..." HER: "Oh, really, that
> interesting ..." YOU: "Yeah ... (insert interesting routine where you are
> letting her into your feelings and displaying a little weakness ...). Now
> a personal questions of her and drill down to feelings. But not the "what
> you look for in a man" conversation as it is awful.


> > Once again if she has enough time to stop and think systematically about
> > real reason you`re there - you`re doing something wrong!
> I think it is okay if she is up with why you are there. I mean it is
> ambiguous, but when you opened, did you really want the opinion of the
guys in
> her group as to whether if you got your tongue pierced it would be cool?
> she kind of knows why you are there, but you want it to be completely
> ambiguous. That is how you can tease her. With out the ambiguity there is
> flirting, only propositioning.

Agreed, but if she thinks systematically about why you are there then that
is bad. If she *kinda* knows why you`re there then that Heuristic thinking -
which is what we want in the main.

> > All her thoughts,
> > all her mental energy should be directed towards thinking about things
> > to provide you with answers to the questions you`re asking
> Yeah, but dont push this too hard. The EV thing can make her think TOO

It isn`t a question of pushing too hard - it`s about asking the `right`
questions in the `right` way. If you`re having to PUSH then it`s the wrong
time for whatever you`re up to.

> Let my point you to an old post by BookGuy that I really enjoyed at the
> on not making her think at all (whom I suspect changed his handle and is
> well and truely with us today ... I recognise him in one of the regulars,
> I may be wrong).
> 005579084
> > 3. Creating/Changing a state / Patterning
> >
> > So we decide to run a pattern.... What is the primary intention here?
> > fuck her? Nope, to change her state.
> >
> > Once again we are directing her thoughts, her mental energy towards
> > something more important than us - her and her feelings. We may be
> > these feelings to ourselves whatever, but if she`s involved in the
> > she won`t have the time to think about anything else - hence the DDB
look we
> > often see.
> > During this why would she even care what your `real` intention is?
> > just some guy `helping` her experience some great emotions...
> Exactly and getting carried away in some great emotions yourself. The two
> you are there both FEELING REALLY GOOD. And you are comforable together.
> you are talking about sex. But not about you and her having sex. Just
> sex as a topic. Like jokes. And stories. And attitudes. And that sort of
> thing.

Agreed - and if you`re both doing this then you`re in RAPPORT

> > 4. Rapport / being Alpha / Body language
> Consider seperating these concepts as they are not linked, moving this way
> and-or dropping some elements completely.

Like I said - these points are in no particular order and just grouped for
initail convenience

> Rapport is overemphasised by SS.
> > The Close
> >
> > Earlier I said "before WE close" I chose that for one specific reason -
> > a PU is done `well` then your true intention should not be "I want
> > from you" whether that want is a number, a kiss or a fuck...
> >
> > The intention of a PUA here should be *I intend to accept something from
> > you* Whilst this may seem at odds with some of the other views within
> > ASF community I believe that if a PU is done correctly then she will be
> > one intending to get something from you.
> Absolutely, but not always going to happen. It is role playing. It is not
> JOB to initiate. It is yours. Do not shy away from this. Ask for the

The point I was making here was that it doesn`t matter who `asks`. If a PU
is done well then you`ll both be thinking the same thing - lets fuck!

You have (hopefully ) initiated this by either controlling the
convo/emotions to the point where she asks or you ask but at this point *she
will be intending to get something from you* either way your intentions are
the same - i.e. I intend to accept

The asking, whoever does it, is only the audible part of what you should
both be thinking

> This is about PHASE SHIFT. You can give away your intents at this stage to
> level of close that you require.

You don`t need to give your intentions away

> I think that you can push the pretext too
> far. I have been watching a guy work recently who will be speaking to a
> for a really short period of time since his conversational game is weak,
> tell her the (cool) nightshot he is going to later, ask her if she wants
> come, then swap mobile phone numbers with her as they both pull out their
> mobile phones in an act of being really pretensious (I am in an incredibly
> pretensios city). Point is, he considers it a number close. I dont. She
> over her number as an OPTION of following him LATER THAT NIGHT as opposed
> saying "fuck off budy". The intent for which you need the phone number
> to be clearer than that IMO. I once was doing a lot of recruitment of
> employees, and went to a recruitment fair. There were plenty of really
> looking girls there looking for work. Now I tried to PU there, but I found
> CONTEXT fucked with me. Like she was speaking back and trying to impress
> because it was a JOB INTERVIEW style conversation even though it was
> THen in getting her phone number, it was written on their resumes. These
> numbers as resumes, and the INTENT of getting to know her socially or
> romantically was not there, so it was no good. They were not numbers I
> use. The same is my point with letting her know why you are closing at
> stage (obviously a kiss close is different, as is an extraction close
> you have kissed her). It is a tricky dance this intent thing.

By getting her number you are intending to carry on your PU at a later
date - i.e carry on these good feelings have fun etc the LAST thing she
wants to know now is that you only want to fuck her. Unless you figured out
she`s happy with that! lol

Just to tag a little bit more onto this - even when you`re fucking your
intention shouldn`t be "I`m trying to fuck this chick" or "I`m fucking this
chick" It should be something along the lines of " I`m enjoying this with
you" I`ll try to explain this by an example:

A couple/few years ago I was seeing a girl regularly for a short while. This
girl was a definite 10! ...yet I managed to fuck things up with her by
saying 6 words! just 6 words! what did I say? I made the mistake of

" I can do better than that "

I knew as soon as I said it I shouldn`t have, in fact I knew before - but
afterwards lying on the bed next to her it just `came out`. As soon as I
said it she knew that I was *trying to fuck her* I was trying to impress her
with my prowess lol Basically I sent myself straight back to the `land of
the other guys` that I was now exactly the same as in her mind.


Unless otherwise noted, this article is Copyright©2002 by "spirit" with implicit permission provided to for reproduction. Any other use is prohibited without the explicit permission of the original author.


 Learn The Skills StoreStore
Click to find out more about The Art of the Pickup
  (Produced by the Founders of