When choosing a potential mate, the female lioness factors in a slew of characteristics. The male lion's mane is considered: the bigger the better. The male lion's size is considered: bigger lions will provide the better genes. The male lion's reputation is considered: the more kills means a successful provider.
Human being females derive their reasoning for mate selection from a more complex chain of logic: clothes, money, physique, social status, intelligence, etc.
This selection process can be long, tedious, and difficult.
But there is one way females bypass this arduous procedure: they rely on the selection skills of other females. The notion that other women will do a better job at choosing better men is a given. So instead of doing the work themselves, women will see a man with a superior woman and think, "if he is good enough for her, then he must be good enough for me". This concept is know as "social proof". This is why it is advantageous for males to associate themselves with females of a higher caliber.
However, there is one great underlying fault to this logic. Think of the idea of "the thrill of the chase". This is when one party's only objective is to pursue another party with no genuine intention of having a lasting relationship. The pursuing female does not realize this though, as her judgment is impaired by the social proof initially presented. This fact makes all consequential relationships short-lived. This is why "the thrill of the chase" is obsolete, it does not exist. It is merely a product of a female's poor decision-making.
Social proof is great for men to use with the intention of having spontaneous sec or a purely sexual relationship, but nothing more.
In conclusion, for the successfull male, it is imperative that social proofing be learned and used.
While unfamiliar to the average person, these terms hold much more meaning to the modern male pick-up artist (PUA). Based around the notion that any male individual, regardless of height, weight or other limiting factors, has the power to seduce any woman he chooses. Using developed, somewhat science-based guidelines, men have chosen to confide in the way of the PUA to attain the desired mate. Furthermore, dedicated PUAs have gone beyond the concept of seducing women and turned the world of pick-up into a lifestyle in which they confide in.
In an attempt to turn the art of seducing the opposite sex into a logical fact-based science, a private online forum was created. In this forum a group of men dissected male-female interaction, leaving nothing out. From how long it should take to respond to a text message to how to handle a compliment, these men made sure to cover all the bases. Furthermore, all suggestions and advice were considered invaluable information unless "field-tested" on many accounts to ensure the effectiveness and success of such methods. Ideas and theories were compiled and rule books and encyclopedias were formed. These men were determined to turn sexual attraction into a science that anyone can master.
Pick-up can be classified as a subculture like any other. There are guidelines that dictate whether one is a PUA or an average frustrated chump, or AFC as it is referred to in the pick-up community. But while classifications can be made and arguments can be held as to who is the best PUA, there is one overlooked concept in the pick-up society: pick-up is merely a support group for males.
In modern society, women are considered to be the males’ object of desire, the prize of the competition. So the obvious idea is that women are the choosers, and men are the chosen. This fact is what makes it so hard for males to do well in male-female interactions. For the most part, men can control what career they have, what car they drive, and where they live. But the one thing they can not control is women being attracted to them. As many men have come to this realization, they have grown frustrated.
PUAs across the country meet for an annual Pick-up Artist Summit Meeting. At these meetings they would discuss new techniques, review old material, and hold registration for future in-field workshops. Pick-up had become a highly organized subject.
In-field workshops consist of five to six students interested in learning pick-up. They are led by mPUAs (master PUAs) who’s only source of credibility is their rank on the forums and performance in the field. The “field”, or classroom, consisted of either a set of night clubs, bars, malls or any other places of public gathering. The students get a de-briefing on what is expected from them as they head out to the field. While in the field, they accomplish tasks such as greeting people as they pass by or starting a conversation with a random person. Every detail of the student’s performance is noted by the mPUA. Additionally, the mPUA will occasionally whisper words of advice and encouragement to the pupils as they are completing tasks. The workshop is then followed by a post-briefing in which the mPUA gives his insight on their performance. A four days workshop is an average of $500. Of course, these workshops are not accredited by any governing body. They have no empirical evidence of success, yet men across the country are willingly paying top dollar to improve their “game“.
The concept of having “game” is universal: the man with the most game is the man who can effectively seduce the most women. However, game is broken down into two categories: indirect and direct game. Indirect game is the more popular of the two. It teaches the powerful effect of subtlety and comfort building. Rather than seeming to approach women for the sole purpose of attraction, they are approached for the time, or for directions, or perhaps a restaurant recommendation. The key to indirect game is to put yourself in a position in which you can smoothly segway into casual conversation, thus furthering your chances of seducing the target (the approached woman).
Direct game consists of getting straight to the point. When approaching targets, students are taught to cut the chase and make sure the target is aware of your intentions from the initial moments of contact. The key to direct game is confidence; anything is a good pick-up line so long as it is delivered with confidence. This remains the overwhelmingly unpopular route.
Pick-up goes beyond the workshops and the ideology of direct vs. indirect game. PUAs communicate through a series of acronyms and phrases. Just by referring to women as “targets” gives the PUA the mindset of a man on a mission, so to speak. They are taught that women should “be rewarded for good behavior”. And should be “frozen-out” when exhibiting bad behavior. Bad behavior includes things such as speaking out of turn, ignoring the PUA, or showing signs of LMR (last minute resistance). The world of pick-up is complex and well organized.
From Cosmopolitan magazine to the Tyra Banks show, women have many means of support to turn to. However, outside of the medically professional realm, men have nothing to rely on for advice on relationships and social life. Constructing guidelines on how to approach and deal with the opposite sex does more than tell men what to do, it gives them something to take comfort in. It lets them put their confidence in someone else rather than themselves; online forums were just the beginning.
Young girls are always taught to be “lady like” so “the boys can like them”. Then in high school society pressures them into constantly maintaining their image, for the boys. And even in adulthood, women are faced with mainstream media and shows like Sex and the City which remind them to look good for the boys. It is undeniable that -consciously or subconsciously- females are constantly being educated on how to attract the opposite sex. While it can be argued that males are also conditioned in the laws of attraction, males are undoubtedly far less conditioned than women.
Neil Strauss, author of best-seller The Game, goes under the pen name “Style” in online forums. Thought of as the guru of pick-up, Style is known for giving advice on the field. He does tackle smaller, specific situations, but his underlying ideology is always the same: confidence is the key. Another guru of this science, Tyler Durden, believes in using different methods, but still believes that confidence is the main part of the equation. Ross Jeffries, noted for his extensive work in the field of neuro-linguistic programming, also includes confidence as part of the overall routine. David DeAngelo is another PUA-turned-scholar who coined the term “cocky-funny”, or “C/F”. C/F is the idea of using your confidence to evoke humor from the target. It teaches to use negs (back handed insults) in order to lower the value of the target thus making it easier for attraction to occur. He preaches that attraction will only happen if the PUA’s value is higher than that of the target. Again, we see that it boils down to a confidence issue.
Can we argue that pick-up is not as scientific as it is made out to be? Was the pick-up community created in an effort to give unconfident men something to place their trust in? By creating terms and guidelines to follow, have the PUA pioneers created a false sense of hope for troubled men? Is it fair that women are conditioned to have more knowledge on attraction than men? Furthermore, is it immoral to even create a community for unconfident males based on manipulating women for the sole purpose of seduction?
The following testimony was taken from Social Skills Institute: “I also just finished a 1-on-1 bootcamp this weekend with Magic, and I'm blown away. I didn't think I could alter my behavior, attitude, thought processes, and body language as rapidly as I have this weekend. I feel like a totally different person when I'm in a club now.”
A co-worker told me a really wacky story the other day that made me think....so I put words together and came up with this short piece. The names have been changed to protect the weird.
She had found the tattered dog collar at her grandfather’s house. Once belonging to a Labrador retriever, she decided to wear the somewhat oversized collar around her waist.
For a lifetime, 11 year old Jane begged and pleaded for a pet dog. However, due to certain housing stipulations, a dog was never allowed
So Jane became the dog.
Starting with wrapping the collar around her tiny waist, she graduated on to convincing family members to “walk” her on the make-shift leash she provided. What seemed like a childhood delusion turned into a full time role to become the object of which she had so greatly desired. This role-play continued for a span of three years.
She progressively became better at it too. With barking being added to the agenda, Jane felt the need to constantly crawl on all fours. Soon knee-holes were wore into all of her pants. Family members would -upon her request- serve meals in a dish placed on the floor. And her sisters regularly walked her; for three years.
Upon moving, writing a sob story to the new land lady, and working out a deal with her, Jane gave up the lifestyle in place of a real pet dog. Her parents were relieved to no longer buy her new jeans on a semi-monthly basis.
We all relate to Jane. We all strive to mold ourselves into our personal object of desire. Men who wish to be like Brad Pitt will mimic his hairstyle or perhaps wear the same cologne he uses. Women will purchase and use the deodorant preferred by their favorite singer or model. And people who have a deep desire of music will get music related tattoos in an effort to “become” the music.
Where does that leave us? On a constant quest to become this object of our desire? Is it hypocritical to even embark on this journey? And what happens when we finally get that pet dog? An article for thought.
To protect the innocent, names are changed and the date at which this happened will not be mentioned.
So there I am flirting via text with a married chick I'd met a day earlier. She just moved into town recently...blah blah blah. Let me spare you the details and move on to the real story.
She told me that her husband was some dude addicted to cocaine and therefore had to get away. Long story short: bang-bang, skeet-skeet. Everything is going well and she becomes a regular in the world of Diesel's Booty Calls.
One night, around 9:30PM, she comes over, we have some fun, and she leaves. I tell her I have work the next morning and can't stay up too late, which is great 'cause she planned on meeting with friends to go to the bars later on. Alright, she's gone and I'm in bed. Perfect. It's about 11:30PM
Then shit hits the fan....
Around 4AM I feel someone lightly shaking my arm trying to wake me up. Wtf? I turn in my bed to find the MARRIED CHICK. In my house and on my bed! Seriously? This is how it goes down:
Diesel: What the fuck are you doin here? Married Chick: I just needed someone to sleep next to. I've been doing it for the past 10 years! Diesel: Alright, go to sleep.
Then she starts grabbing on me
Diesel: Wtf? I got work in the morning. Stop Married Chick: Alright, I'm sorry
Then she starts crying
Diesel: Oh my god woman. I'm gonna go sleep on the couch. Take my bed Married Chick: Oh no, it's ok. Diesel: Ok, then you go sleep on the couch and I'll take the bed Married Chick: No, it's ok. I just wanna be with you Diesel: I can't put up with this shit at 4 in the morning! Go to sleep on the floor then!
I wake up a couple of hours later and guess what I see?
Diesel T Cabrera is sleeping on a bed and laying on the floor next to him is a 26 year old married woman curled up in a ball. I'm probably a bad person for that.
A little more history on the story:
At the time, I lived 25 miles from the main town. She was going to bars about 10 miles, the other direction, from the main town. That's a total of 35 miles she drove to do this crazy shit. At 4AM
The New Yorker columnist Malcolm Gladwell recently wrote a short article on the link between football and dog fighting, shedding light on the negative effects of head-on collisions in football.
While a very well written piece, at 7 AM while brushing my teeth in the shower, I just had to vent my opinion.
Consider an elephant negligible of its mass
Gladwell flawlessly compared football and dog fighting. It was definitely an interesting read because it only gave the problem and no solution, which gave the reader a chance to fill in the blank and look at the situation from a different point of view. He fully supported his claims and presented more than enough evidence. However, I did not fully support his logic. He believed that dog fighting was the same thing as football; it is not. Dog fighting is cruel because you subject two helpless dogs to mercilessly bite and scratch each other.
Football players do not bite or scratch, and with the salaries of these top paid athletes, they are definitely not helpless. Being a football player is not inhumane, it's a consensual agreement that you will trade your long term well-being for a chance at fame. Unlike dogs, humans can make decisions for themselves. Football players understand the consequences. It is incomparable to dog fighting.
I logically rejected eight pages of work in a short blog post, that shows the depth of the piece.
There's something about the American workplace that is mind boggling.
While set out to be a fairly public affair, the American workplace is rather private. Everyone is on a constant search to learn more about the deep lives of their co-workers. The more info you have, the more power you have. Then certain cliques arise and segregate the workforce in two or many groups. My advice, always side with the boss' clique.
We then feel the need to recall the days happenings to our friends, family members, and random people in yoga class. Think to your own job. Do your friends know which female you work with is the office slut? Or which one of your co-workers has the most problems at home? Does your significant other knows who annoys you the most at work?
Why do other people know this much about your work life?
Then there is the concept of workplace relationships. Some are not allowed, some must be reported to supervisors. People get married within the workplace, people get laid through the workplace. It would be foolish to consider sexual encounters in the workplace negligible.
The American workplace scene is indeed a big production put on by the actors (employees). Perhaps the biggest production of its time. This production has an award winning script which includes dramatic plot changes, forbidden love lives, and deep-seeded hatreds. And if that's not enough, this grand production always includes a various assortment of cast members, changing every so often.
The American workplace is a great movie.
For the employed population, workers can be sorted into many different sub-cultural categories. But at the end of the day (5PM, give or take a couple of minutes) our common sub-culture is the workplace.
I'm the guy who wakes up and thinks: "Damn, that nun didn't even see it coming last night". I'm the guy who starts a crazy pyramid scheme, that works. I'm the guy who has sex then invites the girl to stay the night only to hear her say, "No I can't, my husbands home tonight". I'm the guy who has way too much money then he deserves. I'm the guy who always ends up finishing first. Am I nice? Most of the time.
I'm Diesel T. Cabrera and this is my compilation of lessons I've learned through my experience and others experience. 'Cause the only way to learn is to learn from others misfortune and success.
Posts
