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

Home | 

Re: Reasoning behind women mentioning names?

mASF post by spirit

<< Home ... < Relevance Matches ... "pua afc"

Re: Reasoning behind women mentioning names?
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, October 10, 2002

<gunwitch> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

> On 10/2/02 7:17:43 AM, spirit wrote:
> > wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]
> >.com...
> >
> >> Whatever you do dont start doing
> >this for rapport.
> >
> >I disagree - especially as it`s an easy
> >part of pacing, and pacing helps
> >build rapport and can be used in
> >different, useful ways...
> I don't do pacing, so?

So carry on doing what you do....

> >> Being opposite verbally or
> >> at a topical level is negative.
> >
> >Re: opposite at a topical level: My
> >experience is that this is one of those
> >things that depends on context...
> I just "me too" and if i have a thought on it say it back to her, they
seem to
> like it.

Different ways to the same end =0)

> >> But to be disimilar to a woman in
> >other ways is
> >> called being a man. Something you
> >want her to feel not think you are 100%.
> >
> >I couldn`t care less if she thinks or
> >feels I`m a `man` - I want her to
> >think/feel ATTRACTED to me and SEXUAL
> >about me... the rest of `the man`
> >stuff falls into place from there.
> Women are generally attracted to men.

People are generally attracted to attractive ( not only looks ) people...

> >> Mimiking her ways of speech,
> >feminine traits, irrational emotional
> >states
> >> (crying over bullshit), and overall
> >"ways" is no good.
> >
> >I agree about total mimicking but
> >matching and pacing her style at that
> >moment is good as is leading her
> >thoughts & feelings somewhere else a
> >moment
> >later...
> A quick state match can be good for rapport right at the start, but going
> further is to much analysis and isnt aggressive or straight forward enough
> my tastes.

I think we both realise that we both differ somewhat in the practical
application of various techniques... no worries... =0)

> >> Women say "i hate how men cant
> >communicate", " i hate how all men care
> >about
> >> is sex", "i hate when men act
> >macho", yet their boyfreinds cant
> >comunicate, act
> >> macho and want to fuck her all the
> >time,
> >Yeah... but then they dump their BF
> >for someone better as soon as I come
> >along...
> You arent "better" because you are more what they say they want.

I didn`t say anything about them SAYING what they want...

> You, be you
> personallity wise except with a 3 inch penis and only the ability to fuck
for 5
> minuites, and youll only do that once a week, then we'll see whos "better"
to a
> girl youve worked your mojo on, you the way you are or just about any guy
> could satisfy her in the sack?

Well that situation is never gonna happen is it - mental masterbation....

> "Better" to me means a whole package filled,
> ranked in order of importance to her real desires, not ONE societal
> for a "good boyfriend".

...and how do YOU find out her real desires G? you`ve said yourself your
not great at (M)LTRs? ( not intended in a nasty way - just wondered how it
fits into your style/method )

> LAST in importance fom what ive found with women, upon
> meeing you is ability to communicate

I beg to differ - communication comes in all shapes and sizes - I believe
you yourself are rather good at communicating what you want and expect from
a woman in the initial meeting/approach...

> as they know if THEY open up after sex and
> into LTR ANY guy can communicate well

I disagree - just look at how many programs are out there like Oprah and
books about communicating between partners about how `my man don`t know how
to talk..`

> yet its FIRST out of their mouth when
> asked.

Because of the way a guy who can communicate well both physically and
verbally can make them feel... I mean this with respect to both styles.

> >Plus, wanting to fuck her all
> >the time isn`t the same thing as
> >getting to fuck her all the time...
> Then he goes and gets something else

...and how many AFCs do this?

> you seem to suggest that masculine guys
> or guys who cant communicate are lonely or something.

I didn`t suggest that at all...

> Thats not really the
> arguement here, i dont care if you are PUA, AFC, masculine, feminine or
> thats a personal treatment descision. ME? An LTR "has a headache" ONCE i
> out the door, with her full knowledge that its because she isnt atracted
to me
> anymore, isn't interestedin sharing sexual gratification and so im going
to go
> find someone who is right then.

...and that`s YOUR personal treatment decision. If you walk because a girl
doesn`t want sex when you want it then that`s up to you....

> >> and these women dont turn gay?
> >
> >Is that more to do with social
> >conditioning or simply that most of them
> >meet
> >the same uncommunicative, macho, sex
> >hungry men all the time and so think
> >that`s what all men are like and
> >therefore settle for that?
> I think feminism and culture tell them to SAY they settle for that, when
> truth they like it, else they wouldnt like me i guess.

I actually don`t think you`re the same as the `kind` of people I`m talking
about... I honestly believe that if if you were put next to the kinda guy
I`m on about who fits the above description as I see it - you`d come out
tops as the better choice...

> >> SOOOO I
> >> act accordingly and bag my share of
> >the tail.
> >
> >Probably the girls with lame BFs...
> Why get rude?

It wasn`t meant to be rude - I was saying you were better than the guys
they were fucking!

> I didnt attack you.

I didn`t feel that I was attacking you

> Besides that if they are really trying to
> escape the "lameness" of guys like me, why would they be fucking me?

Once again because I don`t think you fit into the same category that I`m
putting those other guys in...

> Wouldnt
> they go find a don juan styled, sensitive communicator of a guy?

That relates to my point above - for many HBs all men are the same in their
minds. Depending on their social circle, where they live etc then, from my
experience, they rarely get to meet a guy that will shatter their
preconceived ideas about men. Therefore in their minds there`s no point
looking for a Don Juan because he only exists in films or `somewhere`

...and I didn`t say anything about being solely a sensitive communicator of
a guy - language and communication can be just as aggressive as physical
aggression. I just use what gets me results...

> Or even an AFC
> who let her call all the shots?

I think many relationships are already like that...

> Hey, you're mr don juan, connection based guy

Now who`s being rude? ;o>

> i can go the same route, then i
> get 1 in 4 rather than 9 in 10 with a sexually aggressive macho style, if
> remember correct you do as well with don juan syled methods.

My method is not totally Don Juan !!! lol I just crack out that shit
where appropriate as part of my `toolbox`

> I thought we kinda agreed that wed always disagree based on that?

True... I was mainly commenting on your post for the other guy - i didn`t
think it would be perceived as an attack on you of any kind

> You and I
> both KNOW what works for us, id say just post our own suggestions and then
> others decide whats gonna help THEM in their style, rather than argue
about 2
> points that are right, but quite different.

It wasn`t intended to be argumentative, I like talking round the whole

> None the less, as ive said theres only really these 2 styles that are
> get you anywhere so PICK ONE, experiment for which is best for you (do
> first as its quicker to learn) or combine the two if you can.

I completely agree with that! Personally I combine the two styles - I love
the whole language thing tho as you know... I still feel that how you use
language can affect your success in PUing HBs using your method, it may not
be `fancy` but what you say counts...

> I wont argue Spirits posts about PU cause i used to get 1 in 4 with
> methods so im sure some people could get 9 of 10 or even better with it.

I agree... but my method is NOT pure Don Juan language style.

> I dont
> think my posts were any different from Spirits 2 years ago, couldve
matched em
> up to the letter. Bascially though i can say that ive tried just about
> other method and gotten 1 in 20 results, RECENTLY now that i can apply
> about anything well, probably 1 in 50 if you are in first year and using
> methods.

Like you I`ve tried every method going too, my results improved from
building upon a game that was originally much like yours.

> I say try mine,

I second that!

> it doesnt work or you hit a sticking point of 1 in 5 women or
> such? Then you learn to theme/pattern on the fly well and gain rapport
> mental tactics and try that, that also gets you a sticking point, tweak
the 2
> into combos. That fails get the tumor cut off your face an stop PUing
> women as any non-mutant can do at least 1 in 3 if he gets his shit

I completely agree - whatever way you go, whatever methods/technques you end
up using, try them ALL at some point but build from a solid core of
confidence and sexuality, from something that WILL get you results. ( and
yes I do mean try G`s method first! lol )


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
How To Tell If She Wants To Be Kissed...