Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

[P]
A Review of Neil Strauss' "The Game: Inside the Underground World of Pick Up Artists"

By thugsonfilm in Culture
Mon Jul 16, 2007 at 12:00:00 PM EST
Tags: PUA, neil strauss, the game, underground, books (all tags)

A review of a book.


So I'd heard of this book through a coworker at a previous job, as well as through a friend. But talk about this book was often from people who didn't actually read it, or having read it couldn't articulate what it was about very well.

So I found myself at Borders and found a comfy ass chair and saved myself the $30 they wanted for this thing and read it there for free.

Well. Uhm. Yeah, it's a fucking long ass book, but not quite the intellectual sado-masochism of Infinite Jest.

Strauss, no nobel prize winning writer but apparently modestly successful with his Rolling Stone stuff, shades of HST, and some popular trash books such as co-author with Jenna Jameson of a book on sex, etc. He doesn't fail to provide for something of interest to the 'common man'. Or, as they say in their peculiar acronym infested jargon, an "AFC" (average frustrated chump).

There is the silly, formulaic "transformational" motif going on here. Strauss calls himself an AFC before he found out about these pick up artist (PUA) techniques. He supposedly was moved in this direction by an editor who wanted a story on this stuff. So he went to some workshops and become a part of this subculture in the process. His first workshop was for $500 in cash, do writers get money to explore stories like this? Is this 'business expenses'? Can they write off their cocaine purchases as business expenses if they write a story about it?

Apparently there was a alt.seduction.fast community back before USENET was destroyed by the borg that is Google and it had some FAQ. This thing produced a 'lay guide' which, like UNIX, was free and then not-free (now). No group of PUA/developers has decided to keep it free and GPL'd that I am aware of. So it's all now in those "get any chick you want, fast!" websites that have the plausibility of a v1@gr@ spam in your inbox.

But the book is something else. Told in an easy to read format with plenty of story development we have a simple cast of characters, mostly Style , Neil Strauss' nom-de-pimp and Mystery, the OG PUA of this level of the Game from whom Style learns.

Style, as Strauss calls himself for most of the book, becomes a rabid disciple of PUA teachers, and quickly becomes a mPUA ("Master PUA") within the space of a year of fanatical effort. In this time he ignores everything, including work, in order to dress up, "sarge" (which means

"look for girls", often at clubs, but presumably anywhere), study NLP - a crap hypnosis based pop psychology from the 70s - how to give chicks multiple orgasms, have confidence like Tony Robbins, study Tom Cruise in Top Gun for macho cocky expressions and so on.

The motif of dramatic personal transformation is what drives many to religion  - to be "born again!" - and it is not surprising to have him mention one PUA student leaves the PUA scene to find God. It is also not surprising that he describes one PUA business as being not just a little cult-like shades of Fight Club, with bald disciples moving into to sleep on a floor while studying how to pick up chix, instead of whatever it was that FC was doing - making soap?. One character even goes by the name Tyler Durden.

So Strauss talks about The Game (routines designed to win and entertain women, split them away from their friends, get their phone numbers, get them into menage-a-trois, etc) as he talks about the strange life of becoming a PUA, following around PUA gurus and becoming one in the process.

The book manages to avoid being too much of an obvious sales pitch except when he talks about his sexual frustrations and plays up what a 'loser' he was which is brief as it was fake sounding. Not that he probably wasn't telling the truth, but few losers seem to be willing to admit it unless they are tacitly claiming to be 'winners' right now, like some born again junky on a soap box.

The movement of time is a bit jarring, but the characters are easy enough to follow. Strauss is a writer for Rolling Stone so he presumably has an above access ability to go to "Hollywood parties" which he mentions in passing. Tom Cruise, Courtney Love and few other celebs make an appearance in the book. The appearance of Heidi Fleiss makes the obvious utility of PUA methods to pimps like Fleiss rather disturbingly obvious. Style/Strauss goes head to head with Fleiss in trying to pick up chicks. Which brings me to misogyny.

Misogyny is mentioned here and there but it is not really discussed at length. I'll give Strauss credit for mentioning it at all, not that music and Rolling Stone are exactly bastions of political correctness. I will give my thoughts on the subject. Essentially the PUA milieu is hyper-misogynistic. The ability to manipulate women into liking them, and sleeping with them, causes men to see women in a rather poor light explains Strauss. But I would suggest that it might be a rather poor light that motivated them to want to explore this possibility in the first place. It might be a woman-haters fantasy to prove to himself, again and again, that women are easy to manipulate, shallow and faithless. The PUA doesn't look for ways to find good women, of it they are found, they look for ways to destroy their defenses. There are, to my knowledge, no active anti-PUA groups out there. What does it prove? That women, even married ones, can be emotionally 'seduced' into doing things they will regret?

Despite Strauss' access to "Hollywood parties" - which he used to bribe one mPUA with - he seems to sarge in normal bars just like everyone else in the book, and he doesn't even claim to have had sex with Ms. Love. Which rang a little hollow.

The level of drug use in this book is almost non-existent, which is frankly hard to believe. Not that PUAs need drugs, just that drugs, esp. in major cities, are everywhere. These guys might be as clean as he suggests, but drugs are around even if they aren't being done by Strauss. He only claims to have "come close" to doing coke, something I found totally impossible to believe. Courtney Love "gave no evidence of drug use" despite having lived in a commune of PUAs with Style/Strauss. What?!?!?! There is no mention of Ecstacy and only minimal mention of Coke, two huge "party" drugs. Even the alcohol is not overly mentioned: we are to assume that mostly sober guys are mostly going after sober chix in some Mormon faux-coffee houz? Nein!!!

But, you are asking, what about "the tech"? Did Strauss talk about his "Game"? He does, and in some fair detail. He approaches a woman and asks her to guess a number from one to ten he's written on a napkin - it's always 7 which mostly works. He does the "jealous girlfriend routine" in which he asks a woman's opinion of whether a friend's ex-girlfriend's pictures should reasonably provoke jealously in his new girlfriend, etc.

So while reading this long ass book, and finding myself somewhat in disbelief of this stuff. I mean this guy carries runes with him to a bar to do rune readings, he also mastered simple magic tricks. This appears to be silly or implausible. Being hungry I went to a local chain sandwich store famous for making some loser lose weight. A pretty Latina came out to fill my order stone faced and professional. No one else was there at that moment so I figured... what the hell? She asked what I wanted and then I said "So.. uh.. if you think of a number between one and ten, I'll bet I can guess it..." she seemed to buy it and immediately said "seven!". I said.. "well, you have to not tell me..." She smiled and immediately said that she wanted to try it again and I was stuck, and my "seven" wad was shot. The next round didn't go well, but what happened was interesting: she was quite friendly, unusually so. She wanted to know if I had any more things to show her? I said uh... no while trying to think of more of the Game but then I remembered the "spell" routine. "Do you believe in spells?" I asked her. Now someone had entered, another customer, and her coworker popped out. I was now feeling pretty bold to be pulling canned PUA material on this girl, but I figured, "who cares?" and wondered what it would look like if I was hitting on this chick right here. No one, surprisingly, seemed to care. I explained to her that a "friend" had a woman cast a love-spell on him to make him fall in love with her. Did she think it was true? She totally fell for it. She admitted to "reading about that stuff and weird things happened and so she stopped". She opened up like a can of tuna. I got a boner. Normally under these circumstances I'd have "number closed" (asked for her number) but I opted to just let it go. I asked for her name, but didn't offer mine to give her the "IOI" (indication of interest) test. She told me her name and immediately asked mine. Bingo. She smiled as I left. It was the most conversation I'd gotten out of a cute girl in the shortest period of time for awhile and perhaps forever. I was blown away. Suddenly all of the crap in the book seemed just a little too plausible. And, frankly, ugly. Suducing girls with boyfriends and even married women seemed very ugly. After all, these guys were supposed to be over "one-itis" (the infatuation with a single unattainable woman characteristic of the "AFC" curable, supposedly, by sleeping with 12 women). And yet they couldn't seem to get over "number-countitis" wanting to fuck everything in sight to get your total lay count up - I just made that up. Upon meeting other PUA scenesters they ask "What's your score?" which means how many women have you had sex with? This social pressure to have indiscriminate sex is just lame. It leads to pressure to screw women in relationships and married women. Fucking other peoples mates is a fool's game which proves nothing and destroys peoples ability to trust you. Also, it's probably the number one way to get someone trying to kill you. I am pretty over that one. If these guys are so good why don't they try to challenge themselves to "catch and release" taken women? I guess the idea of being a "cad" who can sleep with a new woman, taken or not, is so appealing that they can't stop. But, it's like insisting your new firearm always be loaded with the safety off, and any opportunity to fire be used. Sorry for the metaphor.

In sports it is the most skilled who create extra hoops for themselves to make the game more challenging. I was recently playing pool against a friend who was much less skilled. To keep me from slaughtering him more or less instantly I restricted myself to bank shots which I have a hard time with. Our game was much closer.  

So the book is quite an engrossing read and it's not totally flattering to the PUA industry it shadows so closely. Style claims that others bite his techniques, yet these are methods they all shared freely in the A.S.F forums or a web board named "Mystery's Lounge" (which exists still, I think on http://www.themysterymethod.com). Mystery, the other main character, is portrayed as a psycho/depressive. Tyler Durden is portrayed as a total loser who'd rather control guys who want to get laid than get himself layed (Tyler is ironically quoted on the mystery method website and is associated with "Real Social Dynamics" or something like that, a PUA training site).

Style, late in teh book, shoots out an attack on the "robots" that the PUA schools are making, and it seems like a good parallel to any "method" that tries to make a complex topic simple: it has holes.

The PUA game apparently focuses on the "takedown" element of seduction. Actually keeping the GF is not played up, and even symbolic elements like getting phone numbers may be placed above other elements like actually following through with calling - which Style mentioned he didn't do in two notable cases.

Acronyms, acronyms? What's with all the fucking jargon? Well, partly it's almost certainly designed to give the appearance of a secret initiated group. It might have some history of just being related to internet nerdery - are there not slews of acronyms in 'net speak?. Another aspect of acronyms in PUA-speak probably has to do with the ability to talk about PUA methods openly in front of HBs ("hot babes") while being cockblocked by AMOGs("alpha males of group") and so on. It's like those who speak in spanglish or use sign language - a "private language".

Style mentions how shallow and empty the mPUAs are despite their reputations. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying PUAs are necessarily shallow and empty, but this PUA stuff should be at best part of a well rounded arsenal. "Running out of routines" is lame. The routine, at most, should be a segue into your normal self. If you are only playing at being a coy, push-pull, ambiguous player, what happens when you "close" and start spending more time with her? The shallowness of the techniques might be why they place a high emphasis on numbers/volume and turn over: since you are going to fail at the GF game you go for the flashy "turn 'em over" fast game.

Now, I suspect that many of you reading this are single. And even if you are in a relationship or marriage, chances are you might just need to make use of some singles skills if things turn out less than ideal. So for you PUA skills might be more than just a novelty.

The PUA stuff is like white sugar, intense and without substance. It tastes good, changes the flavor of something, but by itself it gives you cavities, makes you obese and gives you diabetes.  The Game needs to be rounded out with real interests, real passions, real goals in life, real self improvement - these various things are to be faked to attract women - e.g. in the "photo trick" you carry pictures with you that give the appearance of being active and with attractive women so you can show them off to new prospects.

To return to the sugar metaphor, a real 'player' would want to have real nutrition in his game, to really be someone who can not only capture women, but offer them real companionship and have a real life. This would be like the difference in a sugar beet - a high fiber healthy good - and sugar itself stripped of nutrition but highly tasty.

Despite his comment on robots I didn't catch any real suggestions from Style, although he does make general points in this direction. The PUA industry has very real potential to be, if it's not already, another means of taking advantage of horny lonely men (like strip clubs, porn and kuro5hin).

Are PUAs losers? Probably, however they appear to be losers who are, at least, getting laid occasionally and probably have a very low fear of speaking to women. It beats a WOW addiction perhaps?

Sponsors

Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure

Login

Related Links
o Kuro5hin
o Google
o http://www .themysterymethod.com
o Also by thugsonfilm


Display: Sort:
A Review of Neil Strauss' "The Game: Inside the Underground World of Pick Up Artists" | 72 comments (46 topical, 26 editorial, 1 hidden)
Wait wait wait... (2.69 / 13) (#7)
by WonderJoust on Tue Jul 17, 2007 at 05:39:50 AM EST

...you mean if you talk to women... they'll talk back?!

I wish I could convey the complete lack of shock and awe I am experiencing.

_________________________________
i like your style: bitter, without being a complete cunt about it.
-birds ate my face

So you have no problems and this (2.25 / 4) (#9)
by thugsonfilm on Tue Jul 17, 2007 at 01:07:38 PM EST

"PUA" stuff is not for you. But I have friends who are like LJ: all crying for lack of female action. They talk only to their female friends (if they have them) who have brushed them off long ago. For them I think it is a revelation.

My revelation wasn't that women talk back, but that they respond to "canned PUA routines".

But this article isn't about how great PUA stuff is, it's a simple review. I am not selling anything, although I think I am generally recommending this as a read (but read it for free, don't shell out the 30 beans they want). It's a fun read.

[ Parent ]

Book may be a fun read. This was not. /in tea (2.00 / 3) (#12)
by WonderJoust on Tue Jul 17, 2007 at 01:31:28 PM EST


_________________________________
i like your style: bitter, without being a complete cunt about it.
-birds ate my face
[ Parent ]

This is k5. It's not supposed to be fun. nt (1.75 / 4) (#14)
by thugsonfilm on Tue Jul 17, 2007 at 02:13:39 PM EST



[ Parent ]
a short, common maxim is appropriate (3.00 / 2) (#53)
by postDigital on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 11:29:40 PM EST

Garbage In = = Garbage Out

Many years ago over a period of about 1 1/2 years, I irregularly attended meetings of Buddhist proselytes of Nichiren Daishonin, originally a Japanese sect, that often is known as Soka Gakkai International. They tell you you can have anything that you want, all you need to do is chant the same phrase repeatedly for a long enough period of time, and your wishes would come true.

Maybe you're familiar with it. It went something like

:

"Nam MeYoHo GimmeaCaddilac"

These meetings had a primary purpose of creating group cohesiveness, and there was a great deal of pressure put upon regular members to get up in front of all and publicly give testament to what desires of theirs had been fulfilled.

There always seemed to be a few women who had been chanting for just sex, any sex with a man. Most, but not all of them had issues with obesity. All of them had issues with self-esteem. Their testimonials of success were often excised tales of serial sluttishness (i'm an old guy, this predated consciousness of HIV by a few years), and the group would applaud her goal attainments in a manner that seemed to be enthusiastic support.

I always found this kind of amusing, because these women just didn't understand, that there exists a significant subset of the male population who will literally fuck any human who will lie down and spread their legs willingly, and do not possess a pair of testicles. There exists an even smaller subset of males that do not even consider the last qualifier to be significant, and will fuck anything that moves. They didn't need no stinking chanting.

The point being, that yeah these methods will work on a segment of the Female population, but in order to obtain usable data regarding its efficacy, you need to have enough awareness of social interactions to be able to filter out those who would have been hooked with only a wink and a nod, and those whose responses were triggered with the use of just kind friendly words. I believe the dataset after the application of those two filters would be filled acute neurotics, a smattering of true psychotics, and humans who would lose a battle of wits with a wooden post. The guys who have last resorted into the use of these techniques are some of the very last persons on earth who should be intimately interacting with them. This reciprocal enabling is bound to have unpredictable, synergistic effects.



[ Parent ]
Heretic (none / 0) (#61)
by tetsuwan on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 12:05:35 PM EST

The only true buddhism is Nichiren Shoushuu, Soka Gakkai are just money grabbers!

Njal's Saga: Just like Romeo & Juliet without the romance
[ Parent ]

are you positive (none / 1) (#62)
by postDigital on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 12:29:14 PM EST

I've been under the impression that he is the world renown plastic surgeon, Dr. Nichiren Shoushuu, who always closes his masterpieces with the Lotus Suture.

[ Parent ]
Why would you read a book (1.45 / 11) (#11)
by GhostOfTiber on Tue Jul 17, 2007 at 01:18:55 PM EST

when you can commit rape instead?  Jeez, use your head man.  The reason why he doesn't mention drugs is because he can't say "Oh shit just get them so coked up they fall limp and rape the shit out of them, it's a lot shorter than a conversation and you don't need a book to shove dust up her nose".

[Nimey's] wife's ass is my cocksheath. - undermyne

Tab of GHB would be cheaper. (2.36 / 11) (#13)
by WonderJoust on Tue Jul 17, 2007 at 01:36:45 PM EST

Slip in it her Long Island Iced Tea.

I call that drink a "Holloway Getaway".

_________________________________
i like your style: bitter, without being a complete cunt about it.
-birds ate my face
[ Parent ]

(0) Hide. Misrepresents effects of coke. (3.00 / 3) (#39)
by thugsonfilm on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 12:38:23 PM EST



[ Parent ]
Never actually done a line eh. <nt> (3.00 / 2) (#64)
by TDS on Fri Jul 20, 2007 at 03:16:34 PM EST



And when we die, we will die with our hands unbound. This is why we fight.
[ Parent ]
-1 article can burn but (2.20 / 10) (#15)
by loteck on Tue Jul 17, 2007 at 02:25:19 PM EST

women need to read this book so that they can see how, by and large, they are incredibly stupid and can essentially be approached mentally and emotionally as though they are dumb animals, somewhere above livestock but probably just beneath the smartest types of dogs.
--
"You're in tune to the musical sound of loteck hi-fi, the musical sound that moves right round. Keep on moving ya'll." -Mylakovich
"WHAT AN ETERNAL MOBIUS STRIP OF FELLATIATIC BANALITY THIS IS." -Harry B Otch

Misogyny is one of the issues I meant to comment (3.00 / 2) (#17)
by thugsonfilm on Tue Jul 17, 2007 at 03:04:48 PM EST

on.

Which kind of begs the question, "If women are dumb livestock, why do so many men have such a hard time talking to, and relating to them?"

Perhaps men are just dumb(er) livestock...?

[ Parent ]

We don't interact w/children and animals much (none / 0) (#21)
by nlscb on Tue Jul 17, 2007 at 05:25:52 PM EST

in the modern world?

Comment Search has returned - Like a beaten wife, I am pathetically grateful. - mr strange
[ Parent ]

my take (2.50 / 2) (#24)
by khallow on Tue Jul 17, 2007 at 08:02:00 PM EST

It's not that women or men are dumb. But IMHO they all have a great capacity for self deception. So a man making the right noises can be misinterpreted by a woman as being far more legitimately interested in the woman than they really are.

Stating the obvious since 1969.
[ Parent ]

They're hard to talk to... (2.00 / 3) (#44)
by claes on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 06:01:10 PM EST

partly because society gives them very mixed messages, and partly because their emotions are cranked up like 10x a guys.

[ Parent ]
Yes, mixed messages is part of it (2.66 / 3) (#50)
by thugsonfilm on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 11:15:32 PM EST

I think that what the PUA stuff does is make a guy very easy to talk to. I mean if you're asking a chick her opinion on a jealous girlfriend, or having her guess a number from 1 to 10, or showing her a magic trick, or analyzing her handwriting or giving her a rune reading, she is "comfortable" to talk to you.

This follows a simple logic that women like the people they talk to. And since initial talk is geared to getting them to say something like "yeah, I'd like to continue this conversation with you, here's my phone number, call me..." the initial charm phase has to be quick and efficient.

I am not sure women are "more" emotional than men, but they are, generally speaking, encouraged to talk about, and observe, emotional responses more than men seem to be. I think men and women are both probably equally emotional "on the inside".

[ Parent ]

So THAT's how it works then (none / 0) (#65)
by Corwin06 on Sat Jul 21, 2007 at 04:26:00 PM EST

And I thought that reducing the rules of seduction to a set of easy abstract principles would be so much harder than the laws of physics... Humans really are that simple. Combine the PUA stuff with some knowledge of psychological, cognitive and behaviorist principles (those that work, even if they're not compatible on the grounds of principles) and you get a full decision tree of what to do to score with any random target.

(Personal side note : so that's why I can't find a girl. They are ALL much more interested by stupid chit-chat than by literally anything I could like to talk about.)

"and you sir, in an argument in a thread with a troll in a story no one is reading in a backwater website, you're a fucking genius
--circletimessquare
[ Parent ]
I don't get this. (2.25 / 4) (#26)
by NoControl on Tue Jul 17, 2007 at 09:23:32 PM EST

Very few people would argue that the sexual instinct is very strong and very basic in guys, if you're a woman, pretty much the easiest and surest way to get laid is to approach someone in a social setting and ask if they want to have sex. About the most negative response you'll get (if you're reasonably attractive) is 'What's the catch?'

In fact, the sexual response of guys, to very simple signals (lowering the eyelids, exposing the neck, touching the hair and so on) is so predictable and so base that it is used for all sorts of things unrelated to sex, selling things (including these crappy 'seduction' books), advertising films, getting people to do things, establishing stratae in society...

So how is it misogynistic to suggest that women also can be manipulated by simple and predictable signals? It may be wrong, but I can't see how it's misogynistic.

[ Parent ]

Challenges social expectations. / (2.50 / 2) (#33)
by vectro on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 10:22:39 AM EST



“The problem with that definition is just that it's bullshit.” -- localroger
[ Parent ]
I can't speak to the nuances of the comments (none / 1) (#36)
by thugsonfilm on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 11:33:27 AM EST

here. But misogyny comes up a few times in Strauss' book, but only briefly.

The concept of the 'pick up artist' whose task it is to presumably deceive, seduce and discard women as fast as possible might strike some as misogynistic.

[ Parent ]

deceive? (2.00 / 2) (#70)
by tardfu on Tue Aug 14, 2007 at 09:47:09 PM EST

I never heard that advertised... seduce and discard, certainly-- but two are playing at that game.

[ Parent ]
Not sure what you are questioning (none / 0) (#71)
by thugsonfilm on Tue Sep 04, 2007 at 01:12:10 AM EST

the high turnover comment? Deception?

'Two are playing at that game' meaning you can 'blame the victim' if she plays along?

[ Parent ]

Worth the read (2.66 / 3) (#25)
by mybostinks on Tue Jul 17, 2007 at 08:41:35 PM EST

and I enjoyed it.

Thanks!

No problem! nt (none / 1) (#38)
by thugsonfilm on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 12:34:25 PM EST



[ Parent ]
It was bad enough that (2.33 / 6) (#28)
by rpresser on Tue Jul 17, 2007 at 11:22:50 PM EST

"I found myself at Borders and found a comfy ass chair and saved myself the $30 they wanted for this thing and read it there for free." .... but now you inflict it on us too?

Please either kill the author or kill yourself ... you've both committed crimes against sensible reading.
------------
"In terms of both hyperbolic overreaching and eventual wrongness, the Permanent [Republican] Majority has set a new, and truly difficult to beat, standard." --rusty

How so rpresser (3.00 / 2) (#29)
by thugsonfilm on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 12:01:19 AM EST

You got something against comfy chairs, or borders, or people not wanting to spend $30 on books?

The list price for this tome of wisdom is $40 btw. Your local library may carry it. I highly encourage you to not purchase it. Borrow it, check it out from the library, or buy it from Borders and return it within 30 days for your full money back.

Read it, laugh, and let it go.

[ Parent ]

I've got something against this subject matter. (1.25 / 4) (#32)
by rpresser on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 09:12:50 AM EST

It is almost as much a waste of time to read about it as it would be to devote one's time to being a PUA.

I didn't read more than the first three paragraphs of your article. I won't read more than the title of that book. And since it is also a waste of time to argue about it I'll say no more.
------------
"In terms of both hyperbolic overreaching and eventual wrongness, the Permanent [Republican] Majority has set a new, and truly difficult to beat, standard." --rusty
[ Parent ]

Well, that's fair then (2.50 / 2) (#37)
by thugsonfilm on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 11:35:59 AM EST

I thought you were complaining about reading books in Borders and not paying for them.

To which I took offense! Do you expect me to shell out money for crappy books written by Rolling Stone writers? I'd rather not sully my shelves with such pap. Hell, I wouldn't even keep a copy of Infinite Jest there either, and that might score me some points with the nerd chick set (or some Deepak Chopra for the dingy new-ager types).

But that was not, I guess, your point.

Cool man.

[ Parent ]

As bad as this was, you weren't REQUIRED (1.33 / 3) (#34)
by Professional Phrenologist on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 10:26:10 AM EST

to read it, you know. I think you secretly liked it. A lot.

----------------------------------

Well, we have to end apartheid for one. And slow down the nuclear arms race, stop terrorism and world hunger. We have to provide food and shelter for the homeless, and oppose racial discrimination and promote civil rights, while also promoting equal rights for women. We have to encourage a return to traditional moral values. Most importantly, we have to promote general social concern and less materialism in young people.
[ Parent ]

You lie! You too want to see k5 die in a flood (1.00 / 2) (#30)
by thugsonfilm on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 12:03:00 AM EST

of crap. You realized this story was crap and wanted to see k5's "journalistic standards" lowered to the lowest possible levels.

This is no meticulously formatted foray into fresh water fishing(!) by any GhostFaceKiller. This is pure crap.

Vote it up Motherfucker!

BEGIN GAME (1.33 / 3) (#35)
by Enlarged to Show Texture on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 10:36:53 AM EST

Time to play the game! +1 FP


"Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do." -- Isaac Asimov
Crap, IHBT (1.40 / 5) (#40)
by Enlarged to Show Texture on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 01:05:05 PM EST

This is what I get for going the tl;dr route. I read the damn thing and it sucks...didn't bother to proofread or anything. It's enough to make me want to vote it down with all my novelty dupes...


"Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do." -- Isaac Asimov
[ Parent ]
Almost none of my stories are proofed (2.50 / 2) (#41)
by thugsonfilm on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 02:22:12 PM EST

and I've gotten quite a few SP and a few FP'd.

Go figure.


[ Parent ]

novelty dupes? (none / 1) (#48)
by postDigital on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 10:22:24 PM EST

Is that how your passing off those cruddy old socks that are all stuck together these days?



[ Parent ]
To know the Game is to play the Game (2.60 / 5) (#42)
by LilDebbie on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 05:35:50 PM EST

You will play it all your life...

My name is LilDebbie and I have a garden.
- hugin -

[ Parent ]
Your knowledge of snack cakes is only (2.66 / 3) (#49)
by thugsonfilm on Wed Jul 18, 2007 at 11:11:15 PM EST

exceeded by your profound wisdom.

[ Parent ]
PUA's - worth discussing (2.00 / 3) (#58)
by Mike the Kid on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 10:41:56 AM EST

Somebody turned me onto the fast seduction thing about four years ago. Shortly before I met my fiance. A lot of the stuff is worth reading critically. It won't make you a happier human being, but it might help to get your head in the game. Thanks for the article, it was very interesting.

Yes, actually I've come to realize (none / 1) (#59)
by thugsonfilm on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 11:03:21 AM EST

that MMM's article on the compleat gentleman was very 'fast seduction' genre inspired.

[ Parent ]
Oh FFS! (2.66 / 3) (#63)
by GiTm on Thu Jul 19, 2007 at 12:46:31 PM EST

My main problems with this:

1/ If you have to spend $US 500 on a course (or do it the cheap way and spend $US 30 on a book) it's not going to work - or at the very least it's going to tell you what you know you should be doing in the first place.

2/ What's your score? You want a score - don't go hitting on girls - go fishing, play sports or go hunting. If 'score' is what is important the last three will give you a better orgasm than the first option.

3/ You are who you are - whether it's by genetics, upbringing or god's will. A $US 30 book or $US 500 course isn't going to change that. The only thing you need to learn is that being comfortable with who you are is enough - if you are a nerd you may not get as many offers as the jock does - but the ones you do get will be far more interesting.

That said - for the small price of $US 350 (funds cleared in advance) I'll be happy to give you a surefire way of having sex with girls. Satisfaction guaranteed!!

cts tells all (1.60 / 5) (#66)
by circletimessquare on Sun Jul 22, 2007 at 02:30:51 PM EST

men never seduce women, women seduce themselves. when you see pick up artists doing they're thing, you only see opportunists taking a woman the final two steps of a hundred step process she has already taken 98 herself: the desire to get laid. in other words, pick up artists don't actually do anything. they merely position themselves to be at the right spot at the right moment when a woman announces her already formed intentions that has absolutely nothing to do with you

i am of course talking about the woman interested in casual sex. the woman interested in a longer lasting relationship is a different beast. she's paying more attention to you. yes, they are two different women, both of whom are interested in sex in different ways (one for making an impression and long term cohabitation, one just for fun), and both of whom can exist in the same woman at different times and places

yes, female sexuality is weird. but it does exist. it's very cyclical, and dependent upon external and internal factors that are very fleeting, fickle and frankly, from a man's point of view, bizarre and retarded. but there they are. and since they hold the keys to getting to a piece of willing ass, we have to pay attention to their alien logic nonetheless

so how to get lots of ass? high volume. you need to get out there and approach a lot. if your ego is made of eggshells, you're toast. get used to rejection, and don't be such a fragile egoed dillweed. and, after awhile, you develop a sixth sense about who is worth approaching and who is not

finally, never forget the one almighty deciding factor: you don't seduce a woman, ever. she seduce's herself. it's kind of relief to think about it that way, you don't have to exert yourself much, just be smarter. but it's also sobering to recognize how little you actually matter. but you just want a piece of ass yourself, right? well so does she. so congratulations, you two mean nothing to each other except warm monkey holes and poles. what, you wanted her to mean nothing to you and you to mean everything to her? pffft, some player you are, more like deluded psychopathic asshole

you need to recognize a woman on the make, and stop wasting your time on cold and green women, they simply have not ripened yet on that weird and meandering path women take to being ready to get poked. for one woman at a certain time and place, she'll drop her pants just by you asking. for another (or the same woman at a different time and place), nothing you can ever do will get her to spread her legs. don't ever forget this and be ready to stop wasting your time the moment it dawns on you the weather has changed

and, after all is said and done, you're not a robotic dick hardening machine. you have feelings too. you will fall for one of them, for sure, unless you are abovementioned psychopath (in which case, you will never actually know joy deeper than an orgasm: your shallow life is pitiful). and if you fall for the wrong one, you are in for a world of pain. fall for the right one, and you are in for... a world of pain. but a slightly better world of pain, as you are now in a relationship

congratulations, you're not a social skills-challenged teenaged fucktard anymore. you've successfully navigated your retarded self into a relationship with the opposite sex. how the hell did that happen? you probably don't even know yourself. but she does: she planned it, aswipe. she actually thinks you're worthy. so don't prove yourself unworthy. unless you don't dig a relationship with her

in which case, welcome to the flipside: yes, it's hard as hell for a man to get laid, and frustrating. however, just think how goddamn hard it is for a woman to mold your lizard-like mind into someone who actually wants to be in relationship. their game is harder than yours

but if you win your game, and they win their game, now you get to breed

oh, heaven help us, you breed


The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

Um (2.50 / 4) (#67)
by trhurler on Sun Jul 22, 2007 at 03:17:59 PM EST

Hard to get laid? Are you serious?

It is dead easy to get laid. What is hard is getting someone you might be interested in. Why? Because every other guy on earth wants that one too and statistically it is VERY unlikely that you are the best looking, most charming, best conversationalist, etc out of the bunch that she's going to encounter.

If all you care about is getting laid, just go to a bar where there are lots of women, find one without a ring on her finger and a bunch of nagging friends around (they do exist,) without being too picky, talk to her, buy her drinks, let her win at darts or pool or whatever without being too obvious about it (it is ok if she suspects, and bad if she knows for a fact,) and forget about getting laid. The conversation, at first anyway, should feel like you've just met someone who might make a good friend. Assuming you followed the bit about not being too picky, if you can't get in her pants (barring a disaster like a bunch of her friends showing up to take her someplace else, etc,) either you picked a Bible banger or something like that or you're a chump. There aren't too many single Bible bangers hanging out alone in bars, which of course leaves...

--
'God dammit, your posts make me hard.' --LilDebbie

[ Parent ]
spoken like a real woman nt (1.75 / 4) (#68)
by circletimessquare on Sun Jul 22, 2007 at 03:49:00 PM EST



The tigers of wrath are wiser than the horses of instruction.

[ Parent ]
also spoken like a true woman. (none / 1) (#69)
by Ta bu shi da yu on Sat Jul 28, 2007 at 08:56:22 AM EST



---
AdTIה"the think tank that didn't".
ה
[ Parent ]
More like spoken like a dead man, amirite? (none / 1) (#73)
by Josh Smith II on Sun Dec 30, 2007 at 07:07:38 PM EST



-- Josh Smith recommends you take a hulver hike.
[ Parent ]
A Review of Neil Strauss' "The Game: Inside the Underground World of Pick Up Artists" | 72 comments (46 topical, 26 editorial, 1 hidden)
Display: Sort:

kuro5hin.org

[XML]
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!