Tuesday, May 1, 2012

Wam Approaches and Warm Environments

The heated discussions on my blog about cold approaching and its futility are now over. In the end, the PUA shills receded. I have been very busy recently and couldn't contribute much to the debate in the comments. Yet, as it turned out, my followers were victorious anyway. If you have the stamina, then take a look at those several hundred comments, if only to make yourself acquainted with the shady rhetorical techniques PUAs use, and how to expose them. Apart from that, you'll also get a big dose of common sense.

I didn't intend to write much more about cold approaching and better alternatives. However, Cani, a member of my forum, wrote a great post in which he succinctly defines warm and cold approaches, environments, and looks. It's a great read for anyone who comes from a background in the mainstream seduction community, or who simply lacks social experience, and it will point you in the right direction.

Here's a teaser:

Warm environment = a situation where it is more normal to be social, meet strangers (well not really strangers), have common interests, ie niche place, exclusive niche club scene, university students, work or school, hobby groups, gym, house parties, events where people were invited. You could say there is a spectrum from least to most warm environment, that is going in to much depth and is too subjective, i do believe it is obvious which is most warm or least warm. An overall definition could be, some place where there is some common interest that binds the two of you, ie shopping in the same shop (least warm), working together (most warm) etc.  
What to do - Just find out about her, normal conversation, depending on type of environment calibrate escalation. Now you can always be fake and lie about the common interest, but that is too much effort and a drain on you self esteem doing that to be worth it. 

40 comments:

  1. You can't write cold vs warm approaches articles without defining what they are first. That's just you being too lazy to elaborate your own preaches. No wonder your materials don't bode well with total newbies. Only the guys who's been around the scene know what's up.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Exactly not to mention that Aaron's definition of cold approach isn't even accurate. A cold approach is a female stranger who you've never spoken to and who is outside of your social circle. That's the universal definition of what a cold approach is. And I can confirm that cold approaching chicks does work.If you know how to do it right. If a person says that cold approach is useless they MUST suck at it.

      Delete
    2. You can't read. Sleazy said cold approaching is "mostly useless", and that your success rate will be much lower. All you fucks do is trying to twist his words. And now get off this blog and stop trying to get links to your lame-ass website.

      Delete
    3. Mostly useless is the same as saying that cold approach is useless. If I say that practicing basketball is mostly useless I am basically saying to don't waste your time practicing basketball.

      Delete
    4. Yeah, and that's exactly what Sleazy is saying. It's a waste of time. It's even a waste of time for guys like Janka and Mystery. I bet the only reason why Sleazy isn't bashing janka is because that dude spends very little time on the women before trying to get her number ,and that he otherwise says that you have to have your foundaitons in order. Most puas on the other hand want you to "plow" and tell you that looks don't matter. :P :P :P

      Recently some dude from RSD joined Slezy's forum to defend himself becasue he didn't like that people made fun of him due to his abysmal success rate and Johnny quickly put him into play. Seriousl,y dude, if virtually all your approaches go nowhere (how's that for an alternative definition of cold approaching?!), then you have to get yur head checked.

      Oh, and if you want to now bitch that there are some typos in my comment, let me just tell you one thing: FUCK YOU. I only bother to respond to you to keep you in check. Otherwise, you'd probably beleive that you are right. I wish Sleazy would jsut delete the crap you post because you just don't listen adn only want to distract.

      Delete
  2. No, buddy! Only guys who lack absolutely any social skills don't know what*s up and don't know the difference between a woman being friendly and being sexually interested. :P

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So we should punish people who need help the most? Oh, they're social retards. Just let them die. They are clueless... (sarcasm)

      If that's the attitude, why bother creating blog and forum like this? Why not just keep it to himself? He gets it, others don't. Why help the clueless masses? A lot of guys aren't that successful with girls.

      Delete
    2. I think all the advice that anyone ever needs is all there on his blog, his forum and presumably his book (which I haven't read yet). You may not understand his pov if the first post you read from him is "Cold approaching is useless", but if you browse around a little you will understand how he writes and what he means.

      I too wrote a post on how to get started for a totally clueless guy on my blog. You might want to see that.

      Delete
    3. Johnny, your blog is great stuff. As a matter of fact, I think newbies should read your blog first before getting into Aaron's blog. That'll help out a lot

      Delete
    4. Johnny said : "I think all the advice that anyone ever needs is all there on his blog, his forum and presumably his book"

      SO TRUE !
      Best you can do is assemble your own style from what these people have succesfully done for themselves, and are willing to share in here. Mostly for free.

      I don't think it's fair to expect everything being spoonfed to you in just the right way, for where you are now.
      You've got to DO YOUR OWN HOMEWORK with what's presented to you !
      I myself have evolved massively in half a year by doing just that.

      It's all here, really. Ready to be put together by anyone willing to put in some effort.

      Delete
  3. I took a "bootcamp" with hyper in NYC back last September. That guy is the biggest faggot ever! I was socially awkward then and really believed he was helping me. Some girls we talked to even asked me why I was friends with him because I was normal and cute and he was weird. All I needed was self confidence. I see now that looks have a lot to do with it as well as screening. I am WAY more successful now and also recognize like 100 times I could have gotten laid but didn't escalate.

    Also took the RSD hotseat with jeffy. 2/3 of the girls he showed on video were fat or ugly and the other ones were barely 8's. Sure he was funny, but I wouldn't pay 300 dollars again to learn some jokes. I took improv classes for 200 that I actually enjoyed. Needless to say I left half way through. Didn't learn a thing.

    I used to come across as creepy for a while. My sister told me she didn't know why I did weird things like approach a woman and her mother while walking in the mall. I'm just glad it's all behind me and I don't have to make an ass out of myself. I am tall and and 8 in looks. I don't need this pickup bs.

    Just wanted to say thy you are doing good Aaron! Your free book made me angry when I first read it, but at the community in general and about being duped. Keep up the good work at exposing these clowns!!!

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. AnonymousMay 2, 2012 07:28 AM
    You can't write cold vs warm approaches articles without defining what they are first. That's just you being too lazy to elaborate your own preaches. No wonder your materials don't bode well with total newbies. Only the guys who's been around the scene know what's up.









    No is not like that ,guy's who have no experience with woman .To give them advise to go talk to any woman and tell them those are targets to whom they need to practice and they can be seduce it's a total ridiculous and unrealistic advise and it can totally ruin there self esteem .Like mention in the other blog by Aaron it's best for unsocial guy's to start of with friends or pick an activity in which they enjoy and at the same time make conversation with stranger's including woman and get some social experience before they start hitting on woman who are open for a chit-chat.



    To be successful with woman you need to have some social calibration and have the experience to spot the girl's who are receptive and interested in you ,not to creep out girl's on your pua mission .Guy's who are social calibrated or guy's who are normal understand this. Guy's who are pua"s or nerdy weirdos who think they are casanovas and think they are social by hitting on random girls to whom are not even interested in them find this hard to understand because they are brain washed and it goes against on the so call matrix knowledge they been taught by a Guru or a pua board.


    This discussion has been explain by Aaron and by member's on this board .The problem with the pua mentality is that they are so brain washed they only read what they want or cherry pick a post and put it on there own words.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You misunderstood me. I don't have problems with what he's saying since I agree with a lot of his ideas. But my beef with him is the way he delivers his message. He's very preachy but when asked for details he's just too lazy to follow up. He's extremely vague. He causes tons of heated discussions because he doesn't bother to clear things up.

      Basically, I agree with his content but don't like the way he delivers it.

      Delete
    2. I'm on Aaron's side too, but I will be the first to say that he doesn't know how to "dumb down" what he says, and make it readable by inexperienced men.

      That aside, it doesn't matter, since COMMENTERS on any post he writes, and posters on his forum always clarify what he meant for newbies. So Aaron's ineptide at teaching newbies is irrelevant, since 2 inches below his post you have someone like Cani* clearly explaining what Aaron meant.

      *- Or countless others

      Delete
  6. If you agree with his ideas ,Then whats the big fuzz about it ?



    Hes explain it in detailed .Many guy's have understood him normal guy's agree with him experience guy's agree with him the only one's who have a problem with his delivery are the guy's who are still consume by pua garbage .What;s the beef Lol ??? that sounds childish any normal player or natural if you want to call him that so you can get a better understanding meets woman through warm signals or a venue to whom they relate to and have a niche ,on that specific venue yes you can cold approach but the success rate won't be good no matter how good looking you are .That's the message Sleazy has been trying to hammer to those zombies .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why do you automatically assume that guys who don't understand Aaron's are all from pua background? You're making assumptions out of your ass. People come from various backgrounds.

      And let's be honest. Normal guys don't go to this site at all. Their dating live is already well-taken care off. They don't need to read Sleazy's stuff.

      There are at least 3 types of guys who read Aaron's stuff:
      1) pickup community
      2) anti-pickup community
      3) complete newbies who struggles with women who doesn't know signals, who doesn't know how to socialize nor how to ask girls for dates. He just heard about pickup community and/or anti-pickup community or he just stumble this site by accident on Google.

      I'm personally on anti-pickup side, but I'm speaking on behalf of the #3 people.

      I think Aaron has a good intention to save these #3 people away from going to pickup community. But if he's too lazy and too vague, then he's just undermining his own effort. He's not doing a great job to his upmost important audiences.

      Delete
    2. I'm personally on anti-pickup side, but I'm speaking on behalf of the #3 people.

      Don't you think it would be better if you let the "#3 people" speak for themselves instead of making assumptions about them? On my forum you'll find "newbies" who have great success after a short amount of time. Check out this thread, for instance:
      http://www.aaronsleazy.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=838&start=10

      Delete
    3. That's because I was the #3 guy a few months ago when I found your site by random browsing. Now I'm #2 but I remember how pain in the ass it was to understand what you're saying. I had to do lots of reading on random posts on your forums to finally get it.

      I see this as your blind spot. I'd hope you'd take this as constructive criticism and something to improve on whenever you write a new blog post or book in the future.

      Delete
    4. Why didn't you just pick up his Minimal Game book for, like what, $9.90? That'S the best investment in PUA prodcuts I've ever made. TO think that I used to spend a multiple on that on books that did nothign but confuse me only embarrasses me when I think of it. If you are too stingy for that, then look aroudn on his forum or read his interviews. It's all there, and almost all is free of charge. It takes some effort but don't complain because all of it is free. No other "guru" is as generous and forthcoming as he is. Heck, in my opinion there's no other honest guru left anymore. Sixty has turned to the same bullshit marketing as everyone else, Rob judge mentally masturbates like crazy, Mark manson is still selling you confused pua crap advice and merely claims he doesn't. The only other guy I liked was assanova. Too bad he took down his blog. Sleazy is the last man standing so maybe you better show some respect for what he does.

      Delete
  7. I am glad you felt this info was good to put on your blog.

    I believe that people who struggle to understand what Aaron is talking about, as it might not be that obvious or detailed or specific etc, probably are socially inept. The best thing to do for those, is not do any game stuff, but spend a year focusing on your fundamentals (fashion, health and fitness, grooming, building a social circle, do things that your like with others etc) first. Then move on to finding women you like.

    The chances are that, guys who socially inept, have let themselves go. Example, playing too much computer games, not working out, studying too much, staying indoors too much, in front of tv too much.

    ReplyDelete
  8. AnonymousMay 2, 2012 11:58 AM
    Why do you automatically assume that guys who don't understand Aaron's are all from pua background? You're making assumptions out of your ass. People come from various backgrounds.

    And let's be honest. Normal guys don't go to this site at all. Their dating live is already well-taken care off. They don't need to read Sleazy's stuff.





    I'm not assuming but majority of the guy's who disagree with this subject are community guy's and Guru's and yes I'm a normal guy who stumble into the seduction community I didn't get consume by it because I was skeptical and Sleazy is one of the few who actually made sense .If you are not part of the pua garbage I apologies .Cani gave you a good responds .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous, tell you what, why don't you sign up to Sleazys forum, make a post in 'Personal Development', explain in detail where your sticking points are and where you want to go from there, but by being completely honest and open for criticism. If you do this and put aside all the PUA nonsense, you'll be surprised how much of a great 'community' it really is (and how much help you'll get).

      No one is wanting to attack you or trying to belittle you, but when you keep going on and on and on regarding Sleazys supposed authoritive style of writing (plus the pua related stuff) then people are gonna get sick of you and dismiss you as a brainwashed pua fanboy!

      I'll be honest, the 'anti-community' as people call it was hard for me to swallow at first. I thought and cringed about all the hours upon hours (hundreds of hours to be precise) learning pointless material and mountains of mental masturbation, only to realise that most of it was garbage and non-practical, its that type of mindset that kept me in my head far too much, (have you tried to learn Mystery's A123/M123/C123 etc etc) its a mindfuck to say the least! Don't get me started on 'fools mate' haha!

      Like I say, having learned to drop 'game/pua' really did hit me hard, but at the same i really needed it and it helped me progress :)

      Delete
  9. NonTard AnonymousMay 2, 2012 at 3:28 PM

    Some PuaTard posted Drivel on the older post today, but I will respond to it here so everyone can see this shit.

    Puatard speaks: I'm now convinced this blog is a cesspool of idiocy. "LOLOLOLO COLD APPROACH FAKE NUMBER"

    You fucking idiot, can you explain to me why both the highest rated direct pua and the highest rated indirect pua have such shitty ratios? Why do they both get piles of numbers that go nowhere!? Both Mystery and Janka admit they only make something out of 1 out of 11 numbers they get.

    Are you so fucking obtuse that you can't judge from the interaction whether the woman is into you or not Cold/warm approach, doesn't fucking matter.

    Really, if it doesn't matter, care to explain why everyone has such shitty rates from indiscriminate approaching?

    See John's story here and his experiment. He only did a quick experiment being selective.

    When approaching strangers selectively he got a 25% lay rate. When approaching strangers indiscriminately he got the same shitty rates everyone else gets.

    http://aaronsleazy.blogspot.com/2012/04/reader-success-story.html

    but I wouldn't be getting IOIs in the first place if I hadn't been talking to everyone the whole night and having fun.

    You
    Go straight to the insane asylym
    N - o - w

    Are you fucking retarded? Do you think Brad Pitt needs to "work the room" before people check him out? Do you think I need to pester random cold women to start getting checked out. I'm barely a 7 for the record.

    The community has turned your brain into such idiotic mush. You can not see that it has warped your mind into seeking approval. You can't even imagine that it's possible for you to be attractive by just existing.

    The community uses your fucked up low self-esteem to sell you bullshit. You have such low self-esteem that you don't believe women would check you out unless you did something to "earn it".

    You are so fucked up and insecure that you believe you need to harass 50 chicks indiscriminately to get the permission to notice warm chicks. But they were there all the time, you're just programmed to feel undeserving of success, so you don't see them.

    By the way, Aaron and his people say WARM CHICKS when they are talking about any woman who's open to being approached, fucked or meeting people. IT's not just women who check you out.

    ReplyDelete
  10. To Anonymous (who keeps repeating that Sleazy needs to define warm vs cold approaches better):

    Sleazy doesn't bother explaining warm vs cold approaches to you because your behaviour is dubious. Here's why:

    1,Over the past few blog posts Sleazy has tried to the best of his ability to convey what he means by cold approaching being useless. You can argue that he has been unable to convey his message properly, however I feel that he has done a fine job and it is your own emotional investment in your own ideas about getting laid that prevents you from putting in a little effort and thinking about what he and others have said before going on and on about definitions.

    2,You attack him for defining it badly.

    3,Then someone clarifies it for you.

    4,Then you continue to attack Sleazy, challenging him on semantics, what is his precise definition of cold approaching. Either you are extremely analytical or you have brainwashed yourself with very old school Mystery Method where you had to deliver your opener at a 45 degree angle lol, and therefore come to the conclusion that clear definitions are of great importance...(not accusations, only assumptions based on your, behaviour)

    Either way your focus is on defining cold vs warm approaching properly, which is very strange when the focus of the topic is to find the easiest way to get laid. Given that, your question is largely irrelevant, as there is NO PERFECT DEFINITION of cold vs warm approaching. Even if there is one, knowing this definition will not in ANY way help you get laid more, which is the focus of our discussion.

    Hopefully this clarifies why Sleazy doesn't bother with people like you.

    Asking questions is great! You insisting on the same question over and over again after it has been answered again and again is extremely annoying.

    It bogs down what could otherwise be fruitful discussion.

    You also conviniently ignore all the people who talk about their transition from pickup to largely what Sleazy describes. These people did not have a problem with Sleazy's vagueness because they knew that Sleazy's aim was not define cold vs warm approaching perfectly. He simply wanted to spare inexperienced men the damage it could cause if they went out mindlessly cold approaching(you may now attack me on inaccurate definitions).
    Which by the way is what PUA companies want as consistent rejections will lower your self esteem and most people cannot cope with it without becoming delusional(RSD: getting laid is not the goal, 1000 approaches - 1 lay etc) and thus you are in the perfect mindset for buying the new ebook on the solution for the problem they have created for you.

    So, if you really don't understand what Sleazy is trying to convey then read the posts by guys who came out of pickup, read the forums, read seductionmyth.com and the discussions there.

    You will see that people who agree with Sleazy on what is the best method to get laid will generally have consistent opinions about what makes a difference while those who argue against it are generally all over the place.

    I hope this helps you and anyone else who has the same question as you.

    NEVERTHELESS,

    Personally I think you are PUA drone sent to attack this blog and ruin discussion and frustrate all the people, who are trying to share helpful knowlegde, until they just give up. A war of attrition favours the PUA companies because Sleazy et al's(seducionmyth, Alek Novy)commercial interest is minimal to non-existant.

    I dont normally post on any kind of discussion, I only like to read them to see if I have any delusions remaining.

    This pattern of attacking Sleazy and the others on things that are unimportant(definitions, style of writing) however was so frustrating to read that I decided to post this.

    ReplyDelete
  11. The definitions that I gave on that forum post, are not exact. Yet I did for the few who dont get what Aaron was talking about.

    Without doubt, approaching is better in warm environments (whether it is cold or warm approach) than in cold environments. If you do want to go down the approach in cold environments, then do what Paul Jenka does or even better do what Goodlookingloser does ( he is far more aggressive, and screens very quickly). Otherwise, just look for girls who are giving warm signals in cold environments (which is rare, but does happen if you are aware) then hit on those, this will give you far better leads.

    On the whole, just reading this blog, associated forum and book, as well as looking at some of the links on the side, should provide you with enough information to improve your sex life.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Hey Sleazy,you and Alek fail to realizze that cold approaching is practical.It is not done in order to # close every single girl you approach.You did make a good point in your other post about my man Paul Janka's bad success rate at cold approach.

    Cold Approaching is to basically get you warmed up,get your conversational juices flowing,and for fine tuning purposes.Not specifically to #-close every chic you approach.

    You need to grasp that Aaron.

    ReplyDelete
  13. @SocialkennyPUA

    Why can't a beginner practice conversation in warm environments until it becomes natural to him. And you do realize NORMAL people don't need to warm up on strangers to be able to interact socially.

    "Cold Approaching is to basically get you warmed up,get your conversational juices flowing,and for fine tuning purposes."

    Anyone who believes or sees validity in that statement is likely to be incredibly socially inept. Do this experiment: tell a social non-gamer this statement and see their reaction(everyday terms, not pua speak).

    "Cold approaching"(indiscriminately bothering women you find attractive) as a means of learning to become more social and/or getting laid is the worst possible strategy for 99.999% of (from the extremely to the mildly)socially inept guys. Just refer to the success rates that have already been discussed, on the blog and on the forums.

    Learning those same things in a more forgiving warm social environment is far less stressful and therefore a better learning opportunity for guys who lack basic social sensibilities.

    Cold approaching is not practical. Paul Janka is not the rule he is the exception. He has setup his life in such a way as to make cold approaching work for him. Most of us have lives outside of pickup, real jobs, hobbys and pursuits that take up most of our time.

    Also don't forget that Paul Janka has great foundations: Tall, Good Looking, Intelligent, Confident, etc. And has chosen to dedicate more than 5 hours a week(I'm guessing) to approaching girls on the street. Add to that he lives in New York, which is a big enough city to do it without repurcussions.
    This same behaviour in a small town would get you labeled as a creep. Again refer to accounts of posters who have experienced being labeled as a creep. Both here on this site and there are plenty more sad stories on PUAhate, you just have sift through the spam.

    SO NO, cold approaching is in no way practical. You need to grasp that SocialkennyPUA.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Do you guys notice that most girls won't even look at you in the eyes in clubs even if they're perhaps interested? Last weekend I experimented with the don't approach-until-you-see-warm-signals and I came out with zero. I dressed well, in great shape and well-groomed and no girls gave me any warm signal. It made me feel really depressed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I will answer in case you are genuine. A lot of PUA shills come here and play dumb on purpose to confuse Aaron's message.

      A warm signal does not mean that women stare at you. A woman that stares at you is not sending a warm signal. She is sending a hot signal.

      Warm signals are much more subtle. Read cani's post on warm signals. Also see illuminatus' over exertions post. Also, some clubs don't have warm chicks at all- change the club.


      More than likely you were too nervous and darting around angrily looking for the chick who's staring. You need to relax and notice the girls who are hovering. Notice the girl glancing over the shoulders.

      Also you can have generally warm girls. So you don't have to wait for girls who are warm to you specifically. You can see girls who are warm in general. They look like they want to meet guys.

      For example two hot girls standing in the middle of the club and constantly looking around the room. They are asking who is going to approach us now. Come on somebody approach us.

      Delete
    2. This is a very real thing. Sometimes guys who get out of PUA go to the opposite extreme and suggest that girls are checking you out all the time and you just have to notice, but it isn't necessarily true. AlekNovy in particular, while fantastic commenter in general, makes this mistake a lot.

      The truth is there will be MANY nights when you go out and NO girl notices you and makes eye contact and gives you approach signals. Guess what that means? Yep, it means that in that particular venue on that night, NONE of the girls there are into you. You just have to accept it and get over it. Laugh at yourself a bit and don't take it seriously.

      Now, it could be the venue, it could be the crowd that night, or whatever, but I think for most guys they will have lots of nights like this. Sometimes it could be a few nights in a row, but it usually picks up sooner or later. If it doesn't, then you should probably search for different venues where the girls are more your crowd. And at the end of the day, you might just have to accept your limitations with girls, which are individual to everyone.

      The important thing to note is that if you approach girls in this kind of situation they will NOT respond well. It is very tempting to think that if you "just approach" these un-receptive looking girls, it will go down smooth. I have tried that - trust me, it does not work.

      You just have to accept that on some nights there is NO opportunity for you. That's just how it is. No biggie.

      Delete
    3. I usually go for women who seem warm in general. You don't need women who explicitly are staring at you. Have a look at the over-exertions post. Those things are more subtle and for that, you will build up your intuition over time.

      Try to listen to instincts more. If you "feel" you have a shot with a girl but you don't clearly know why, just follow that instinct. Also, venues tend to be very important. I find that quite a few mainstream club are just not very conducive to meeting other people and also that people are not that open in general to meeting other random people

      Delete
    4. @One of the anonymouses above

      "extreme and suggest that girls are checking you out all the time and you just have to notice, but it isn't necessarily true. AlekNovy in particular, while fantastic commenter in general, makes this mistake a lot."

      I have NEVER EVER EVER NEVER EVER EVER NEVER EVER said such a thing.

      It isn't our fault when some of you people have reading problems and read things that are not written on the page.

      Aaron writes for example: "There are women who look approachable everywhere you go"

      Reader responds: "That's not true Aaron, women are not staring me wherever I go".

      Who's fault is it? Aaron's or the reader's? It's not Aaron's fault if people misread.

      Me personally, for every 1 paragraph of thought I write, I end up putting 4 paragraphs of clarification, just in an attempt to not be misunderstood, but I get misread ANYWAY, and then get accused of writing too long :D

      What we HAVE said (johnny, cani, me, aaron, etc) is that on a typical week you should be getting dozens or hundreds of over-exertions and then noticing hundreds of GENERALLY warm chicks (get it?). Not women checking you out, not staring at you. That's pretty rare even for handsome men. Very few women are confident enough to check you out blatantly. For most men the choice is between subtle over-exertions and generally warm chicks.

      Specific to you warmth:
      This means women hovering near you, brushing against you, accidentally looking at the same products at the supermarket. You somehow notice the same chick seems to always be looking at the same products you're looking at, and she has been doing it for the past 2 minutes.

      Warmth in general:
      They talk loudly and look around the room. They over gesticulate everything they say. They chuckle and hold a super big grin as they dance and look around the club. (there's hundreds of these)

      The anonymous also said: "The truth is there will be MANY nights when you go out and NO girl notices you and makes eye contact and gives you approach signals. Guess what that means? Yep, it means that in that particular venue on that night, NONE of the girls there are into you."

      That's not true lol :D That's utterly bullshit. That means there are no super-confident girls who like you. Most girls don't have the confidence to be this blatant, even if they like you. Women are far more subtle.

      Delete
  15. @AlekNovy, maybe I should not have said "checking you out" specifically, all I meant was "indications of interest". What you have said is that a typical guy will be getting IOIs all the time and just has to learn to notice it. I find this is to be completely false.

    As for whether girls have the confidence to be blatant, I simply don't find what you say about this correct or convincing at all, and I find it confusing and dangerously close - if distinguishable at all - from the PUA idea that all girls are into you and you should be hitting on everyone.

    I have acted on the "subtle" indications of interest theory many times, and it ended in disaster each time, so I am simply skeptical. If a girl is into you, she will be very clear about it.

    If I seek eye contact and a girl refuses, it is pretty disastrous advice to say that that does not mean the girl is not into you - that is exactly what it means. If a girl does not constantly stare at you, that's one thing, but if she refuses eye contact and does not "notice" you - at all - after you have been standing right next to her for 20 minutes, you would have to be a social idiot to not grasp that she is just not into you.

    Glancing at a guy, making occasional eye contact, checking a guy out, are very far from constantly staring and carries with it no social cost whatsoever - such things do not require any special confidence on the part of girls, nearly all girls do it ALL THE TIME to guys they like and wish would approach them, and to suggest that only the super-confident girls do this and most IOIs are "more subtle" is just disastrous advice to give men.

    You have some good advice Alek, but some of the things you say are still rooted in the PUA mindset. It's like when you used to say a man can get more girls by being "charming" (I am not sure you still do) - which is simply another form of trying to be liked and being a "pussy beggar" and an idea rooted in PUA thinking. When I was first trying to get out of PUA your "charm" idea led me to a few months of still basically "trying" to get girls, before I realized that it too was just another PUA-like idea. Look, I am not blaming you - you are fallible like all human beings, that's all :) You say some good shit but you often have some lingering PUA idea traces in your thinking which need to be rooted out :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You spouted a whole bunch of misconstructions and BS, so I'll take them one at a time:

      A) I don't have time today

      B) I want to make sure you UNDERSTAND things before I move onto the next point (read word for word, and confirm understanding before we move on)



      READY? Point number one.

      "If a girl does not constantly stare at you, that's one thing, but if she refuses eye contact and does not "notice" you - at all - after you have been standing right next to her for 20 minutes"

      WHO EVER SAID THAT? Why are you acting like a PUA shill misconstruing things? Who here has EVER SAID that if you stand next to a chick and actively try to get EC from a chick for 20 minutes and she doesn't return it, that it means she's warm?

      You are EITHER deceptive on purpose or have some agenda? Why are you taking things into extremes and killing subtleties? Are you a PUA shill trying to introduce noise on purpose?

      I find it confusing and dangerously close - if distinguishable at all - from the PUA idea that all girls are into you and you should be hitting on everyone.

      No...
      Just fucking no.

      How the fuck did you misconstrue things so badly and kill all subtlety? When Aaron (and cani and others talking about warm chicks) say this it is ONLY in response to the guys whining "ooooooo boooooo if I only approach chicks who stare I won't have enough chicks to approach. What if I miss out on the shy chicks bohoooo"

      Let me SPELL IT OUT for you, I hope you don't misconstrue again

      PUAs: Approach anyone COMPLETELY indiscriminately, you have an equal chance with everyone

      Aaron Crew:
      - You only have a great chance of getting chicks who outright send you BLATANT signals

      - It is theoretically possible to get chicks who send more subtle signals, but it isn't as productive as the blatant chicks, since the gray zone chicks are either shy, less confident or only have mild general interest

      GET IT? The discussion about subtle chicks was ONLY in response about which chicks you have a *theoretical* chance with. You are producing this strawman that Cani is for example saying a subtle chick is just as productive as blatantly interested chick. NOBODY HAS EVER SAID THAT. That was only in response to the recovering PUAs whining about missing out on non-blatant chicks.

      Make sense? Not only is nobody recommending that you hit on every random gray zone chick (a blatant misrepresentation on your part), but Aaron and everyone following him says to MOSTLY go for green zone chicks (blatant signals) and occasionally gray zone chicks if you must. You misrepresented that as aaron-crew recommending that guys hit on every subtle chick in sight.

      Aaron crew is not saying to go for gray-zone. They're only saying that gray-zone chicks are the only non-blatant chicks whom you have a THEORETICAL chance with. Make sense?

      If you prefer TO TEST FOR EC FOR TWENTY MINUTES AND ONLY GO FOR BLATANT NOBODY IS STOPING YOU. WHY ARE YOU ACTING JUST LIKE THE PUA SHILLS who earlier acted like aaron is stopping them from approaching non-blatant chicks. Why are you turning everything into black and white rules just like PUAs?

      Is it clear for you now? Please confirm

      Delete
    2. P.S.

      I will admit one error on my part


      When I wrote this paragraph:
      This means women hovering near you, brushing against you, accidentally looking at the same products at the supermarket. You somehow notice the same chick seems to always be looking at the same products you're looking at, and she has been doing it for the past 2 minutes.

      I left out the OBVIOUS subtlety that she's glancing over her shoulder subtly every now and again. I assume that's COMMON SENSE. When people say "checking out" they mean blatant EC. When we mean a chick continually looks at the same shelves as you OF COURSE it includes a half second glance in your general direction every few seconds. DUH!

      Again, the more obvious details I include, the longer my comments get, and eventually they look like fucking novels. But if I leave out even one OBVIOUS detail that goes WITHOUT saying, someone immediately uses it to misconstrue everything I say. I'd expect it from PUAs, but not non-puas.

      Delete
    3. @Anonymous, I owe you an apology

      I'm finally fully back home, and just read your original comment. The first misconstruing came from me.

      You said
      =====================
      "The truth is there will be MANY nights when you go out and NO girl notices you and makes eye contact and gives you approach signals. Guess what that means? Yep, it means that in that particular venue on that night, NONE of the girls there are into you."
      =====================

      I responded
      =====================
      "That's not true lol :D That's utterly bullshit. That means there are no super-confident girls who like you. Most girls don't have the confidence to be this blatant, even if they like you. Women are far more subtle."
      =====================

      Here's what I misconstrued about you

      I actually responded as if you had said "some nights no girls stare, that means not a single girl likes you"

      So I made a mistake and read something you never said, and responded based on it.

      You obviously meant "if all night not a single girl glances in your general direction, not a single girl returns EC etc etc".

      So my fault...

      p.s.

      This doesn't excuse the 10 misconstructions you made of me though. Like saying I'm telling people to hit on every possibly-maybe-kinda-potentially interested chick in sight... that's the exact opposite of what aaron and everyone here says.

      I'll respond to your charm thing with studies and clarifications in a few days, after you confirm we're on the same page on this thing here.

      Delete
    4. Hey Alek, thanks for the apology, I do appreciate it!

      So you are saying that the best results are with girls who give you blatant signals, which includes at least fleeting eye contact, and that you might get some OK results from girls who seem warm-ish but are not giving you blatant signals, and that girls who seem hostile or utterly indifferent are pretty much a wash.

      I can agree with this, if this is indeed what you are saying, completely.

      My original point was in response to that poster who was upset that he got no blatant approach signals, and was simply to say that for most guys, lots of nights there will be NO girls who are giving you blatant signals, and maybe even none that seem warm-ish, and that such nights are just a wash and need to be accepted as such. That just happens. Part of climbing down from the PUA fairy tale is to accept that lots of times we simply will be going home alone, and to not think this is unusual or a cause for despair. It's normal. It usually passes. If it doesn't, it might be a venue problem, or it might just be something about life you cannot change.

      I have found that some guys, including you, downplay this fact and emphasize that girls are constantly giving us IOIs to the point where for guys who don't find this to be the case feel there is something wrong about them. I think I get where you are coming from, and you are just trying to open guy's eyes, but I personally feel this message interferes with the mental process of reducing expectations to realistic levels, which is crucial for mental balance and a key step in moving away from the insanity of PUA. No, girls are not giving you IOIs every time you go to the supermarket or the mall, for most guys (I feel), and there is nothing wrong with admitting this. Sometimes this happens, but I do not think it is a regular occurrence for most guys, however open their eyes.

      I know you and Aaron and crew explicitly talk about lowering expectations and what is realistic and what not, but I find that certain things you guys say with equal emphasis - like what I singled out above - conflict with this message.

      As for the studies about charm, I would be interested in seeing them, but I have to be honest, just for theoretical purposes. I have no intention of trying to be charming, no matter how effective studies showed them to be. I have restored a great deal of mental balance to my life by abandoning such concepts once and for all. I think it is merely another form of trying to please and make others like you (indeed roissy talks about charm a lot). Social liking should arise spontaneously with an appreciation for the genuine personality of the other person, with the only thing either party needing to do is be polite and sympathetic, nothing more.

      I have eliminated from my behavior all attempts to appeal to people and have shifted the focus to merely exhibiting my genuine personality in a polite fashion that respects both me and them - this took time and effort, and makes me feel good and strong. Even if I found out tomorrow that trying to appeal to people - by being charming, perhaps - would increase my chances with women tenfold, it would not be worth it for me.

      I do thank you, by the way, for taking the time to clarify your position for me!

      Delete
  16. Aaron, I just wrote a long response to AlekNovy and it was on the site a moment ago, but it seems to have gotten buried in your chache or something. If you could look into it that would be cool, thanks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for letting me know. Your comment ended up in the spam folder, for whatever reason. I just fixed it.

      Delete

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