PUA culture is one extreme of a fundamentally flawed society. However, what you hear and read in the mainstream is equally damaging. Homely girls get told that “inner beauty” counts, while shy guys are encouraged to keep acting passively, because one day some princess might recognise them after all and realize what a wonderful person they are. It’s rare that anybody bluntly tells girls that if they want to fuck hot guys, they better be hot, too, and guys that if they want to get anywhere with girls, even average looking ones, they better have something going on in their life. Dating is not like primary school where everybody gets a golden star for warming a chair.
This was a long prelude, but what prompted me to write this article was a comment I read on a wholly unrelated blog by a guy named Michael O. Church who writes on Silicon Valley culture and the sociology of pathological organisations. I've been following his blog ever since I came across his astounding Gervais / MacLeod series (look it up!) that analyzes a lot of the problems of corporate culture. I’m not sure how much overlap there is between his audience and mine, so I’ll simply quote the relevant part:
[X] is like being that guy who barely takes care of himself but expects to date a supermodel.Just look at this wonderful analogy! If more people had that much common sense, the entire PUA fad would never have gotten off the ground. I find it quite telling that guys like Mystery and Style were targeting geeks with money and poorly developed social skills. Presumably everybody else saw through their nonsense right away. They were telling guys that exact same thing, namely that they could all bang models and movie stars. They all told fairy tales about guys who allegedly did so, of course after learning "game", yet were never able show any proof, either that one of their students was dating women outside their league, or that they themselves did.
On a side note, the overly critical among you might want to point out that Michael O. Church should have, more correctly, written “barely takes care of himself and has no money”, but that would be a bit silly. After all, it’s not as if supermodels don’t have any choice. She could chose a sloppy millionaire, but just as well one who looks after himself. This hints at another obvious truth the deluded PUA crowd never acknowledged: you don't meet women in a vacuum.