Tuesday, February 7, 2012

The Final Word on Indirect Game (Hopefully)

Sometimes people ask me what I think of this and that guy's “method.” If a name gets mentioned a couple of times, and I have some time to kill, I have a look. Thus, I recently spent an hour or so skimming through Roissy and Roosh’s stuff. If you want to know what I think of it: I’m appalled. It amounts to little more than old indirect game presented in a new veneer. Roissy pretends to be an intellectual, while Roosh believes he is a non-conformist. Apart from that, it’s the same old, same old.

“But what is wrong with indirect game, Sleazy?”, I hear some of you speaking in your feeble voices. I’m glad you asked. Here’s a big one: You pretend that the girl is utterly stupid. While there are certainly plenty of not especially intelligent women out there, just as the world has no shortage of stupid guys, women are not so stupid that they don’t see through your facade. Or why do you think that many women quickly shut you down with your “opinion openers”? It’s because they are not attracted to you. If you look like Fabio in his prime, you could walk around telling “knock-knock” jokes, and all women would be in tears, but if you look like Quasimodo, or Vince Kelvin, then women will hardly give you the time of day. This reminds me of a guy on Zan’s Ars Amatoria forum who stated that he had gotten 2 dates out of approaching roughly 1,000 women on the street. (No, no sex.) Seriously, when will some people realize that whatever they are doing is just not working.

Indirect game operates under the premise that you can “create attraction”, and that women are somehow turned off if you indicate sexual interest too early. However, as every man who is successful with women knows, they are surely turned on by it if they are turned on by you. "Creating attraction" is just another red herring. Sure, if you are part of the 1% and flaunt your wealth, then some women will come, but they are then more interested in your money.

To further illustrate my point, let me refer to the world of comedy. In the middle ages, only “fools” were allowed to say the truth, and likewise, nowadays comedians enjoy the same privilege of telling things you couldn’t otherwise propagate through the mainstream media. If you are vaguely familiar with stand-up comedy, you’ve surely come across Chris Rock. One of this most infamous routines is called “Want some dick?” Here’s a YouTube clip:




In a nutshell, the message is that no matter what you say to a woman, she’ll hear “want some dick”? Of course! Why else would you talk to her? Or do you honestly think that your asking a complete stranger for a “female opinion” can hide potential sexual interest on your part? If you now want to contradict, then why don’t you go around and ask women whom you find physically repulsive for their female opinions and or where chocolate mountain is? See!

But I’m not done yet. One of the current prophets of indirect game is “Roosh.” When he’s not busy exploiting his economic advantage as a Westerner in former communist countries, he writes books and sells them at ridiculous prices. One of his more recent one is called Day Bang, and here is a gem from it:
She’s writing something in beautiful cursive on pages that have floral borders. She’s using what seems to be an expensive ballpoint pen. What’s the elderly opener? In this case there are two possibilities. Your instinct may be to ask, “What are you writing?” but remember, that’s personal in nature and not likely to get a warm response. She may think of you as a nosy man trying to gain access to her closet of secrets. The best elderly opener from this situation is, “Excuse me, is that a good pen?” You’ll then inquire about the brand, the color of the ink, its width, and if it’s comfortable to hold for long periods of time, all with a serious expression on your face. Almost pretend you’re a pen salesman on the first day of the job, doing research in order to eventually sell it to others.

Did you also throw up in your mouth when reading this?

Listen, she’s only interested in talking about inane stuff like that if she finds you attractive. However, you stand a good chance of losing her because she might secretly ask herself what’s wrong with you if you can’t be open about your intentions. No, this doesn’t mean that you should say, “Wanna fuck?”, but that you have no legitimate reason to hide your intention. Well, maybe you are a pussy, so I guess that's one reason. Remember that many of you indirect guys have huge problems turning an interaction sexual? This is a consequence of such pathetic behavior, because if you manage to convince the girl that you have no sexual interest, then she will of course not view you as a potential sexual partner. Do you understand, Neil? Erik? Tyler?

The other big problem with indirect game is that you are only kidding yourself. A common defence is that the woman is not rejecting you. No, she is rejecting your opener (and there is of course nothing wrong with you). No, don’t worry, you don’t have to get in shape, and fix your appearance. The women are only ever rejecting your openers, not you. Everything is fine, keep going! Seriously, do you really believe any of this?

Let me tell you how it really is: Your “opener” is irrelevant. If she finds you unattractive, for whatever reason, then it doesn’t matter what you say to her. No, she’s not rejecting your opener, but the guy who hit on her. Just live with it! I can understand that some people want to protect their fragile egos but, honestly, what’s the point? The women give you valuable feedback, and if your conclusion after approaching 1,000 women and getting laid only once is that the other 999 were only rejecting your “opener”, then maybe you should get your head checked.

I know that common sense is not common in the “community”, and logic is about as highly regarded as in a circle of 50 year old housewives who add scotch to their afternoon tea and get all giddy when they find some “truth” in their horoscopes. But, honestly, don’t you want to grow up? If it makes you happy, then keep living in your la-la land where all the women only reject your “opener”, and keep rubbing one out to Internet porn. Alternatively, you could grow the fuck up and stop hiding behind lame excuses and rationalizations. Do you know who else acts like this? Shallow, insecure women.

56 comments:

  1. Watch out, you'll be the next person to be accused of being me.

    Roosh/Roissy fans literally have this conspiracy theory that says that every single person who ever has said any negative opinion of Roosh/Roissy is an AlekNovy sock-puppet. Mostly because I was the first person to write a strong critique.

    There are now 30 people who are all said to be me... No, I am not kidding. These two guys literally attract cult-like followings.

    Their fans are very weird (into racism, white nationalism, conspiracy theory, UFOs, fad diets).

    I mean community gurus in general attract weird fans, but these two guys are especially magnetic for weirdos.

    Read the SkynetTheory here:
    http://aaronsleazy.blogspot.com/2012/02/dirty-secret-of-community.html?showComment=1328636955183#c1056559350527432680

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I already came across a blog comment where someone claimed you were a sock puppet of me, and I hope your ego can take this. ;)

      I've got another piece about Roosh in the pipeline. Occasionally, some guys have brought him up in conversations, and now that I have had a look at him, my conclusion is that he's doing not much more besides selling Mystery Method with a touch of misogyny and American supremacy.

      Delete
    2. >I already came across a blog comment
      >where someone claimed you were a sock
      >puppet of me, and I hope your ego can
      >take this. ;)


      WHAT??!!? NOOOO!!!!!!!!!

      Delete
    3. This means I'm no longer good enough to have everyone named after me :( Rooshites don't see me as enemy number one anymore?

      Oh well, enjoy the puppet-master role. It keeps changing people. It was handed down to me anyway (before Rooshy-ites and roissyites accused everyone of being a sock-puppet of a guy called BlackPill)

      Delete
  2. Related to this

    http://aleknovy.com/2011/11/21/direct-vs-indirect-game-bla-bla-measuring-real-results-and-the-delusional-power-of-false-positives/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's a good post! I sometimes argue in a similar vein, but I got the impression that some otherwise very intelligent men quickly throw logic out of the window if the right carrot dangles in front of them. You demonstrate the absurdity of their views, and they just don't want to hear it. It may be a woman leading them on and extracting thousands of dollars of them (or setting them up for much worse things), but sometimes mere hope is enough for them. You could also explain gambling this way. It's probably better if you hit them with similar messages over and over until it start to slowly sink in.

      Delete
  3. This post is a failed attempt at discrediting indirect game.

    I don't fuck with Roissy since he's never showing love to his readers like you do.But this is just a nonsensical-post tryna bash indirect game which reigns supreme.Face that shit bro'!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Depends on how you define "success". If you define it as protecting a weak ago and never getting directly rejected, then indirect is superior at that. It's amazing at making sure you never get directly rejected...

      If you define success as "getting more pussy". How do you explain the fact that every single indirect gamer who has his success rates has the same success rates as AFCs and anyone doing direct?

      Not a single one has ever shown (or even claimed) to get more chicks per 100 approaches than direct.

      Delete
    2. BTW Alek,you're the biggest troll in the community.Why don't you just team up with PUAHate lol?

      And your stats are BS.I don't know where you get those numbers and claims from.You're very insighful and I'm gonna check out your blog(if you do blog).But you should quit the hating and quit the AFC'ish attitude.

      Delete
    3. Kenny,

      why are you defending people who don't have you best interest in mind? Oh, I get it, it's because you can't think for yourself and readily believe everything that is supposedly popular or allows you to protect your ego.

      Now go and read the article again. Maybe focus on the highlighted passages first.

      Delete
    4. Hey Aaron,who are you to say who has whose best interest?The shit works!Bottom line!Before I was a PUA:I wasn't fucking getting laid.Since I entered the community,studied,etc.Lays,SNL's became the norm.So what are you telling me?You telling me the PUA community doesn't help guys with getting laid?I'm testimony.You are too.So quit it bro'.

      Delete
    5. Kenny,

      you still don't get it. You don't get laid because of "game" but despite of it. All it is is taking care of your "foundations" and approaching chicks. The elaborate theories those "gurus" build are not only unnecessary, they are harmful because they make you focus on completely irrelevant aspects.

      I'm sure Alek will chime in and tell you about "false positive." Heck, I may just directly point you to one of his articles: http://aleknovy.com/2011/11/21/direct-vs-indirect-game-bla-bla-measuring-real-results-and-the-delusional-power-of-false-positives/
      Have fun, bro!

      Delete
    6. The elaborate theories might not be the key to getting laid,but it does no harm.

      So you're advocating that the community should do away with teaching of female & human psycology?

      And bro,I'm no newbie,so no need to come off as if I have no game and you and Alek are gonna be schooling me.

      Delete
    7. So, wasting your time, ruining your chances, and giving you a twisted perception of reality is your definition of "no harm"?

      Delete
    8. So giving a girl a good experience and taking her on a good ride is doing harm?I see Naturals and players who know nothing about PUA,I see them in field boring the shit out of chics!!So if I were to run a routine on her(or the set)like the classic Strawberry fields or the Cube,you're telling me that that would be doing hard or would be a bad thing?

      Delete
    9. Kenny,

      you are misrepresenting what I said (again).
      You confessed that your own success rate is very, very low. Yet, you claim that all those "naturals" who you claim to bore those women get laid. So, what's the problem here? The problem is that you don't get anywhere, and you nonetheless defend those inane technique. Get real!

      Delete
  4. I just noticed the lowblow at my man Vince Kelvin.You going all out with the disses Aaron.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What, you are trying to defend Vince in light of the evidence? Sorry, but you are either completely brainwashed or in business with him. Otherwise, I see absolutely no reason how anyone could stand up for that guy.

      Delete
    2. Evidence of what?That VK was once in rehab?We all have shitty stories about us.And I'm not in business with VK.He has good game(cold reads),and I have success with his routines.Why is that a crime?

      And for your info,VK charges the lowest price out of any gurus when it comes to bootcamp,etc.

      Delete
    3. Kenny,
      I am not so sure that all of us were once in rehab, but that's completely besides the point. I'd make fun of Vince no matter what his background was. The evidence is right in the videos this guy posts.

      So, you equate "cold reads" with "good game". Nice try, bro, but sadly this crap doesn't get you laid. If the girl doesn't like you, you'll only creep her out, and if she likes you, it's a waste of time (and complete bullshit anyway, because only peabrains are susceptible to such nonsense).

      Crime? What crime?

      Regarding Vince's prices: I don't know, and I don't care how much he charges. It's as if someone becomes legitimate just because his snake oil is cheaper than the one the competition sells.

      Delete
    4. If I were an AFC,I would totally agree with your points.

      But check this out,you may claim that cold reads doesn't get you laid-of course your right!But,it damn sure aids in the process of banging that girl you're gaming.

      Plus,why not take women on an emotional ride?That's my big duh question to you.Why is it such a bad thing for guys to take women on a fucking ride via cold reads, canned stuff,routines,NLP,elaborate # close routines,etc.Wouldn't those things quite naturally intrigue the target that you're not just another boring guy?

      Delete
    5. Is this really your experience? Mine is that women see straight to your bullshit when you try to pull off canned routines.

      Delete
  5. Just referencing an article by 60 - its a bit extreme but very very important to understand. http://howtogetwithagirl.com/blog/articles/are-you-good-with-women-or-good-at-seducing-women/.

    Also, indirect/direct is not a black-white line. Its got a lot to do with social intelligence. If you meet a girl at a church, you probably don't want to attempt an instant make out just because you know "direct" game works at a nightclub. Similarly, at a loud crazy techno nightclub, asking for an opinion is also incredibly stupid.

    I feel the point is to not beat around the bush too long as the girls are not stupid and that they love sex as much, if not more, than you do.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies

    1. Also, indirect/direct is not a black-white line. Its got a lot to do with social intelligence. If you meet a girl at a church, you probably don't want to attempt an instant make out just because you know "direct" game works at a nightclub. Similarly, at a loud crazy techno nightclub, asking for an opinion is also incredibly stupid.


      You have to realize that when Aaron is critiquing "indirect game" he is not critiquing the concept of a being un-agressive.

      Indirect-game as defined by these people and generally understood is the idea that you can pretend to be non-interested, and then TRICK a woman into being attracted to you, before you show your interest.

      Make sense?

      People who are critiquing "indirect game" are not saying "go and grope ladies in church" lol no... They're just saying "you can't create attraction, and there's no reason to hide intentions".

      That doesn't mean you have to walk up to every chick you like anywhere and go "wanna fuck" :D It just means don't invest so much energy into pretending you have no interest.

      The level of aggression you use will be a matter of personal preference, and dependent on context and location.

      Delete
    2. I agree Alek.But check these stats from my history of Game:

      I wanna believe that Aaron is an advocate of "no-canned routines".But check this interesting fact from my life:ever since I dropped canned routines and made up my own routines and openers(since I'm advanced PUA now),I can't get laid consistently LMAO.But when I fist entered the community,I was getting laid left to right off of old-school canned material lmao!So for those who wanna bash canned routines as fake,don't work...I think y'all have to re-think that.Cause I've been using my own routines over the past 2 years but I'm having dismal results.

      Delete
    3. Kenny, you still don't get it. It's not the routines (or lack thereof) that gets you laid. Maybe read my book "Debunking the Seduction Community" (it's free), or check out SeductionMyth.com.

      Delete
    4. Yeah I don't think SocialKenny understood almost anything about what you wrote about Sleaze, like the part about the "opener" really not mattering, what they are rejecting or are interested in is YOU even though they already know you wanna fuck no matter what you say. Or the part about the red herring on creating "Attraction", it's funny because he himself says he dropped other people's canned routines that got him laid and used his own routines that also got him laid. It's funny he should also take offense to this because there is no way around direct game, sooner or later you're gonna have to do it, even Mystery has to become direct 7 to 10 hours even if it's only to freeze out her LMR.

      Delete
    5. Dude,who ever said that a good opener was key to getting laid!!?It's a foot in the door.What can't y'all get about that?An opener is an ice-breaker.The better,wittier and more interesting the opener,the more it hooks.I thought that was common sense?

      Delete
    6. Socialkenny,

      it doesn't matter if the opener "hooks" or not because the opener itself doesn't. You do. If she likes you, then basically anything will "hook."

      Delete
    7. Good point.But don't you think it reduces the chances of her remaining attracted by you opening with something lame,boring and DLV?Of course.Don't pretend as though a girl could never become unattracted to the guy she initially liked.So you get a half point for that one.

      You're very correct that it doesn't matter what you open with(as long as she likes you prior to opening via body language,etc.).

      But you're also wrong in suggesting that the target cannot lose attraction if you turn out to be a boring guy.

      Delete
    8. SocialKenny, if you open w/ something lame, boring, DLV, that just means "YOU" are a lame and boring person of low value and you have issues in your life that are gonna seep through after when you can't keep up the false indirect facade, routines and lies of "Who lies more?" (coincidentally the dummies answer their own question by asking that.) That's what indirect does, make you a weak liar, a fake, and it will eventually be seen by women. Indirect does not help you at all, it does not help you become a man in touch with his sexuality or w/ women's sexuality. It makes you a fearful coward hiding behind his true intentions, afraid that if he shows interest he will lose her, not knowing he will lose her anyways.

      Delete
    9. Kenny,

      don't put words in my mouth. I never said that "the target can't lose attraction". My patience with you is wearing thin as we pick apart your arguments one by one, and you respond by using shady rhetorical means.

      Delete
  6. The more and more I move away from game and still hit on women, I am beginning to believe that it really is just looks and types. It is actually quite astonishing. Almost nothing I do makes any difference at all - the girls have already sized me up and made all sorts of conclusions about me based entirely on my appearance and dress. Its quite incredible. While it is true you can *fuck it up*, I really now believe that this is way over-emphasized. What you have to do to fuck it up with a girl who digs you is stuff normal guys rarely do and is extremely unlikely to ever really happen. Basically just dont be a fucking jerk and be fucking normal. Anything beyond that is just over-complication.

    In a way this gives me a free, light-hearted spirit when I go clubbing and hitting on girls, as I know there is almost nothing I can do to make it happen OR fuck it up. On the other hand, this truth can be experienced as terribly oppressive because it is incredibly deterministic. It is a truth that really needs to be experienced to be fully absorbed (as I said, it is quite shocking), but it also takes quite a but of courage for most guys to really leave things *up to fate* in this manner.

    I fully understand why so many guys kick and scream in their struggle to accept that their chances with women are severely limited by their genetic potential. BUT - if you learn to accept this, you become happy, calm, serene, and free spirited, and social life can become a happy round of pleasure ;)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is a fantastic comment. Thanks a lot for posting it! I will re-post it on the front page of this blog because I want more people to read it.

      Delete
  7. Danke, Aaron ... für deine guten Beiträge und Theorien. Ich bin auch auf deiner Seite. Du hast vollkommen Recht, mit dem was du sagst. Dass du in der PUA-Szene damit eher auf Ablehnung stösst, hat einfach damit zu tun, dass die Leute nicht gerne die (harte) Wahrheit hören wollen. Sie glauben tatsächlich, sie könnten mit dem "richtigen Opener" landen - egal ob sie übergewichtig, unmodisch und unattraktiv rüberkommen oder - schlimmer noch - sind. BULLSHIT!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey man,

      thanks for your comment. However, please only write in English on this blog. While I understand German, only a fraction of my visitors do.

      Delete
    2. OK, kein Problem. Mein nächstes (inhaltliches) Posting kommt dann auf Englisch, versprochen Letzte Fragen auf Deutsch: Ich will mir via Kindle dein E-Book "Minimal Game" kaufen ... gibt es das nur in Englisch oder kommt da bald noch (wie bei "Schmierige Geschichten") eine deutsche Version? Und, rein aus Interesse: Was ist eigentlich deine Muttersprache, die du besser beherrschst - Deutsch oder Englisch?

      Delete
    3. Ja, Minimal Game gibt es nur auf Englisch und ich beabsichtige nicht, es zu übersetzen. Übrigens, über Book Depository kannst Du das Buch auch recht preiswert als Paperback bekommen. Im Gegensatz schlägt Amazon.de leider immer recht viel auf den ursprünglichen US-Dollar-Preis auf.

      Meine Muttersprache ist Deutsch. Englisch kann ich aber auch recht gut. ;)

      Delete
  8. Sleazy... You, you must sell game books?
    Dude stfu and put in work, roissy doesnt even sell shit or promote shit.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Didn't I convincingly demonstrate that Roissy does promote bullshit? Maybe you should read the article again and read it with an open mind, instead of lashing out at me because the truth makes you feel uncomfortable.

      Delete
    2. The funny irony here is that Aaron holds seminars and people can verify him in real life. I've also challenged a few Roissyites to come visit me life and I can demonstrate live.

      The even bigger irony is that Roissy has NEVER EVER demonstrated any usage of the theories he recycles.

      In fact, he bans people from his blog for merely asking him about his application or success rate. And I don't mean critics, even if a fan of his asks anything of such a nature, he gets ip-banned for life.

      Delete
    3. Didn't I convincingly demonstrate that Roissy does promote bullshit?

      Did you not learn yet that these people don't even read what you write? Their mind is literally programmed to skip arguments against their cult's god.

      You will see, they are programmed to find problems with the messenger, so they can excuse reading and pondering the message.

      They ussually say shit to me like...

      -> You probably are a 60 year old geek who can't even get laid, and are jealous at Roissy

      Actually I'm a ripped 27 year old, and I can demonstrate live

      -> OH WELL you are probably PISSED OFF at the community coz they ripped you off and you were stupid to pay too much money to gurus, so you now criticize all of the community

      Actually I made a ton of money from the community and didn't spend a cent on it

      -> Oh well well welll, mystery probably fucked your dog, and this is why you hate the community!!!!!

      .... You'll notice their cult-brain has to keep inventing reasons why the MESSENGER is wrong, so that they are able to not read the message. And even when they read the message, they completely misread it (they actually read words that don't exist on the page!!!!)

      Here's more on Roissy's moderation tactics:

      http://aleknovy.com/2011/12/27/chateau-is-an-insecure-cunt/

      Click on the name Mike to see the source of that quote...

      Delete
    4. About Sleazy Selling A Book

      I'm not comfortable with that fact either, but it's just one book, and here's the facts.

      There's by now some 10,000 active ex-gamers, anti-gamers, non-gamers and ex-community guys. We all say the same things.

      Only one of us has a book, and that's sleazy. You can't dismiss Aaaron's arguments because he sells a book, since the other 9999 ex-gamers all make the same arguments. IN FACT some of us say the exact same things even before having met each other!

      That doesn't mean Aaron is completely off the hook

      I've been writting a public letter to Aaron since 2 weeks ago, but due to being busy I still haven't finished it. I doubt aaron will become the next 60, but there is always a danger.

      Yes, some guys have used the anti-pua angle and then sold out later for money (like 60, like paul janka)... For the moment being, aside from being friends with a few guys who are slightly questionable, Aaron is 100% legit, and his one book is more than worth the tiny asking price.

      I am still going to write that warning letter though.

      Delete
    5. Alek,

      that article on Roissy's comment policy was most interesting. When I first came across his blog, I thought that people just can't be that stupid. But heavy moderation explains that very well. By the way, some of my comments on his blog are also stuck in the moderation queue, apparently for eternity.

      I'm looking forward to your public letter. Don't worry, I have no intention of "becoming the next 60."

      Delete
  9. Alek, why not post videos on youtube? I for one would love to see your methods in action ;)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What methods? The whole point is THERE IS NO METHOD.

      When you meet a chick you like, you ask her out.

      Would you like me to also post videos of me taking a shit, eating and also taking a bike ride?

      Delete
    2. When you meet a chick you like, you ask her out.

      OR, if you have more balls like GLL and Aaron Sleazy, you escalate her physicaly right there and then, making the physical moves and trying to pull her home, physically.

      Now, I've never had the balls to try what GLL/Aaaron do, but common sense says it should work for sluts who happen to be horny for a guy just like you. I don't see anything questionable about Aaron's and GLL's claims either.

      They reveal up front that it's a numbers game, and you will get told to be a creep or simply physically rejected by chicks who don't want you.

      Same thing with the "ultra-amazing and revolutionary" ask a chick out method. No anti-gamers claims to get amazing results or beat the odds.

      Delete
    3. Speaking of videos on the most basic things: Have you seen this one on "The Art of the Handshake": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9Y6US-LndU
      (I'm surprised at the low view count as I remember a high quality version that has had many more hits.)

      It is a parody, but on pickup forums it's sometimes recommended. ;)

      Delete
  10. Alek, I mean a demonstration of you in action. Its probably hard for people to come visit you, so why not post a video of you in action doing no game at all and getting some rejections and some successes. While this would in no way verify your success/failure rate, it would at least show examples of success with no game whatsoever.

    On second thought, if the whole point of your invitation to people to come visit you is to show that you have the same success rate as the most vaunted game gurus, then there would be little point in posting videos.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Eh, truth is my suggestion is stupid......gamers already concede that it is possible to get girls who no game, they just call it Fools Mate and say it is far less frequent than would be the case if you did game.

    So there really would be no point. It seems I simply did not properly understand the point of your invitation. I withdraw my suggestion...nothing to see here, move along ;)

    ReplyDelete
  12. Exactly. We are claiming that all lays are foolsmate.

    These people are claiming to beat the numbers game (go above foolsmate)

    They need to demonstrate that they can beat the numbers game. One can always fake video. I can record 10 rejections, and 1 success, and claim that's my ratio (but in truth I am not showing you I really got TWENTY and only showed you 10 rejections in the video AHA!!! lol...

    But ya, the point of my invitation is that I am calling their bluff.I can demonstrate live that if you go out with me, and I approach enough chicks, a few will accept to go out with me. It's a numbers game.

    "they just call it Fools Mate and [they] say it is far less frequent than would be the case if you did game."

    Exactly. They CLAIM to beat AFC-method (ask chicks out till one says yes method lol). They consistently and regularly refuse to be tested in real life. They REFUSE to partake in an experiment where they would prove that they get higher-than-random success rates.

    http://www.seductionmyth.com/just_prove_it/the-experiment/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Those guys don't even get fool's mates, which is why they disparage them and refer saying stuff like "dude, that's cheating", or "that's not solid game".

      I've heard plenty of shady things about infield videos, and stories about "planted targets" on bootcamps are floating around as well. But even if they all played fair, it's still a fact that videos grossly misrepresent interactions. Just look at RSD's "greatest hits". They go around filming half a year and what they come up with is not really that impressive. Check this out: http://truthofrsd.dinstudio.com/diary_1_14.html

      Delete
  13. Regarding Roosh - I just read his blog out of curiosity. You gotta give the guy one thing - he is funny as shit. I was laughing so much through so many of his blog posts and random tweets.

    Then other shit is also extremely funny. He published a book called Don't Bang Denmark. It gets discussed on a panel show in Denmark. Then he gets death threats from Icelandic chicks, gets called a sex tourism operator, gets called worse than the Nazis, people "warn" of his arrival etc. That is some international notoriety!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Roosh's shtick is to be offensive to the "mainstream", and thus appeal to a certain group of people. His "Don't Bang Denmark" book is ludicrous and only reveals that he is a crude character who is unable to adopt to the customs of a different country. Thus, he didn't get laid, and then he turns around and tries to insult an entire nation (just like he did with Iceland). Girls from Denmark are among the most beautiful in Europe. They are also very educated and confident (yet still feminine). It doesn't surprise me that his "shit" doesn't fly there, seeing that he seems to target an entirely different segment of the female population otherwise.

    I do think that he is funny at times, but his humor is often not inherently funny but merely insulting. Tucker Max also thought that this was how to become famous, but it hasn't worked out so well for him in the long run. (Tucker had a long post on his "Tipping Point Moment" some years ago when some women and manginas tried to boo him off stage.)

    ReplyDelete
  15. I don't agree with everything aaron say's but you make some great point's but socialkenny, doesn't have any integrity and soent keep his word so I discount anything he has to say about anything. at least aaron seem's to "tell it like it is" and I love that keep up the good work,.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.