Saturday, May 29, 2010

Seduction Industry vs Get Rich Online Industry, Part II

The Salty Droid article I referenced in my last post had an interesting comment by the user sidon:

@RunBrunsonRun, These people and all steal everything from everyone else because they are so freakin clueless about making something right in the first place. See they all think the other guy knows everything they need to know so they all end up doing the same thing over and over and looking such freakin idiots (like right now for Ray, Schirmer, Byrne, Vitale, and on and on). Their life becomes a viscous cycle of copy cat syndrome.

You obviously see the very same happening in the "seduction community". They are all running around like chicken with their head cut off, coming up with new concepts on "attraction", which is all just mental masturbation. One guy copies from the next, trying to integrate it into his "method". Recently someone emailed me that some other "guru" has copied some of my concepts, but about something like that I can only laugh. If the whole method is nonsensical and misleading, then having some sound aspects won't do much good.

Friday, May 28, 2010

Making Money Online vs Pulling Girls

The seduction industry is relatively small. Someone recently said, if it were a house, it would be a shack in the woods with neither electricity nor running water. However, this industry is very similar to the "making money online" industry, which is just as fraudulent. Its beyond the scope of my blog to cover the latter in any detail, though. However, Salty Droid, one of the blogs I follow in this area recently posted some interesting (and elegant, as my mathematics teacher would say) graphics.

It doesn't take much to see how this is applicable to the seduction industry as well:

(source: Salty Droid)

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

Contacting me via email

I'm currently going through my emails, and probably I'll be able to clear my complete backlog. However, some people have used the contact form on my website and mistyped their address. In this case, if you expect an answer from me but didn't receive one, please email me again. This applies if you've asked a question --- I don't always reply to people who send me comments due to the volume of emails I receive.

If you've sent me an email to my email address, then please refrain from sending me reminders. I will get back to you.

Thank you.

Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Log of Chat Session with

Some days ago I mentioned an upcoming chat session with the guys over at We've had an interesting discussion. Topics included:

  • My ebook "Debunking the Seduction Community"
  • Dance floor game
  • Spotting receptive women
  • My development

...and lots of practical advice.

Check it out, it's well worth it! You can read the log either at (thread), or on my forum (thread).


Sunday, May 23, 2010

Chess and LMR

This is a follow up to my recent post What Chess and “Game” have in common.

Some days ago I had a Q & A chat session with the guys over at I got asked a number of really great questions. One was how I deal with so-called "last minute resistance" (LMR), i.e. you've got the girl home and now she doesn't want to do it. However, in my world LMR doesn't really exist. The very few times a girl stopped me, it was because she was on her period and had some hang-ups about it, so this wouldn't even count as "LMR" in community terms.

But what has this to do with chess? It's simple. In chess, the opening moves determine the character of the so-called mid-game, and even the end-game. It's somewhat ironic that Mystery always uses chess metaphors, even though he seems to have a rather limited understanding of it. In his "method" you'll obviously get "LMR" because you don't convey your sexuality enough. At one point you surprise the girl, after all the "comfort building", that you --- actually for real --- have a dick. This might rightly shock her, and in turn make her not want to put out. The opening determines the end game.

On the other hand, if you are very sexual from the outset, this simply won't happen, because the girl knows what's going to happen once she is alone with you. And she will want it to happen. Again, the opening determines the end game.

This is just some food for thought. But don't despair if you keep running "structured game" and run into LMR --- just do as Mystery says and pull out your portable chess set. Challenge her to a game! :P (I can't believe people really gave such advice, and others followed it.)

Friday, May 21, 2010

What Chess and “Game” have in common

Many years ago, the chess-bug had caught me for a while. I bought dozens of books, spent literally hours every day to study the game, and I got reasonably good. This means, I was good enough to grasp the fundamentals of the game, but I certainly wouldn’t have been able to hold a candle to a master. Nonetheless, my insights into this board game where profound enough to know when someone is talking out of his a** when it comes to chess. Yes, I’m going to do some community bashing, but please bear with me, there is something to be learnt here.

First of all, a beginner thinks he has to consider every move and wrongly believes that chess is all about thinking x moves ahead. But the contrary is much closer to the truth. While chess is a game of strategy that requires long-term thinking, mere powers of calculation won’t get you anywhere if you have no idea of basic principles such as pawn formations or open lines. Heck, a beginner doesn’t even see the “lines” and he can’t even evaluate the relative strength of various moves. The parallels to “structured game” as taught by some in the community are obvious.

Further, the in chess the number of possible moves is absurdly high. Some claim it’s higher than the number of elements in the universe. Of course, the vast majority of all possible moves is bad, but even if you focus on just the potentially good ones, you’ll quickly reach the limits of your mental capacity. What does that leave us with? Intuition.

I have recently read the somewhat dry book "Bobby Fischer goes to War", which recounts the famous 1972 world chess championship match between Fischer and Spassky, a contest that frequently got interpreted as a battle of Capitalism (US) and Communism (USSR). Apart from insights into cold war politics, it had some decent descriptions of the aspects of the game of chess as well, such as this one (p. 64):

The real explanation of what chess players do is less rational. It is closer to what we might think of as an artist’s vision and has to do with a kind of intuition. A chess player examining a position does not see an inanimate set of carved or moulded pieces waiting to be moved from square to square, but diagonals and ranks and latent possibilities; what Arthur Koestler described as ‘a magnetic field of forces charged with energy’.
The same is true when it comes to seduction. It is not a matter of rationality, as the proponents of “structured game” claim. You can surely have some success with it, but you will never get a real understanding of the deeper principles. It’s like with chess computers, who have tremendous powers of calculations. In this regard, they were hugely superior to human players, but could (until relatively recently) be beaten with certain anti-computer tactics that specifically addressed their weaknesses. In the meantime, though, grand masters and programmers teamed up and created beasts such as Hydra (which incidentally got beaten by a computer-assisted human player).

We don’t blindly calculate possible moves in our head, but we see the possibilities --- and we follow a strategy. That’s why a solid “game plan”, i.e. you know where you are going and you are not just fishing in the dark, is so important. The individual moves (“routines” and “techniques”) are far less important.

Wednesday, May 19, 2010

Chat Session with tomorrow

Tomorrow I'll have a chat session with the guys at I'll answer questions for about an hour. You can submit questions in the thread Chat sessie / 20-05-2010 / Aaron Sleazy. However, for that you'll have to register first, in order to access this (primarily Dutch speaking) forum.

An interesting side note: was founded after people got more and more discontent with the rampant censorship and random banning of people in the Dutch section of Love System's Attraction Forum. As far as I can tell, it has become a rather active community and is already the premier forum in the Netherlands.

Monday, May 10, 2010

Who is doing the choosing?

Some time ago one of my friends sent me a link to an article in the Independent with the title, Why women really do love self-obsessed psychopaths. He probably thought it to be a friendly jab, targeting my personality. I never felt offended when people called me narcissist, so I read the piece with some interest. The key message was the following:
A study has found that men with the "dark triad" of traits – narcissism, thrill- seeking and deceitfulness – are likely to have a larger number of sexual affairs.
This seems quite obvious to me because risk-averse men are surely not "putting themselves out there" and approach girl after girl in the attempt to get laid more often. Too bad, that the headline was misleading. The article presented some scientific research, yet, the headline editor drew some strange conclusions. It's not that women necessarily love those "psychopaths" more than other men, but if those are more active in the pursuit of pussy, then, obviously, they are going to have more success than others who prefer to dwell in mother's basement and hunt down unicorns in World of Warcraft.

So, single men of the world, keep this mind:
The dark triad of traits are the self-obsession of narcissism, the impulsive, thrill-seeking and callous behaviour of psychopaths and the deceitful and exploitative nature of Machiavellianism. "We have some evidence these traits may represent a successful evolutionary strategy," Dr Jonason told New Scientist magazine.
 Some, he says? He should have asked me, because I have plenty.

Monday, May 3, 2010

My View on

A number of people recently asked me why I was promoting so much. First of all, I don’t think this site is without its flaws. There are way too many trolls on there and even serious discussions regularly get hi-jacked. However, you quickly learn to disregard useless contributions and can focus on the good stuff.

The unique value of this site lies, IMO, in its openness. It is the only bigger forum where you can freely speak your mind about the seduction community. Of course, some people are taking it too far, and sadly a great many of them seem to be rather immature and/or unable to use proper English. Arguing with those people is about as productive as teaching dolphins how to climb trees. The worst aspect of this site, though, is that some people only “hate” the community because they are unwilling to admit their own failures at life. Frankly, someone who hadn’t gotten laid in over a year has no business bashing anything, and sadly those are sometimes the most vocal people on this site.

However, despite all those shortcomings I have found a lot of gems on PUAHate and met a few very critical and intelligent people. I am glad this website exists, and I am thankful for all the “lulz” it provides.

Saturday, May 1, 2010

Feedback on "Debunking the Seduction Community"

Since the release of "Debunking the Seduction Community" I have received a lot of feedback. A thread on has over 140 replies, and several dozens of people have emailed me. It will take me a while to get back to all of them, but I will post a couple of interesting passages on my blog and discuss them.

One of my highlights so far is a guy who wrote:

Thanks for the ebook. Upon reading it I deleted all my pickup materials and I'm starting tonight with doing things my own way.

That's the spirit! It's gratifying feedback like this which justifies the amount spent on the ebook.

Also, the first release was a bit rushed and there were some typos in it, which I have now fixed. Get revision 1.0a on my website.