View Single Post
(#10)
Old
Sync Sync is offline
MASTER PUA
 
Default 03-02-2009, 09:04 PM

Interesting stuff, although I don’t think classical routines and personal passions need to be mutually exclusive.

“You should only learn things that you think are impressive or that you love, then talk about them with passion.”

I disagree, this demonstrates behavioural inflexibility and ignores the inherent importance of certain knowledge. Of course it’s central to have integrity about topics that are of genuine personal importance as this makes the passion communicated authentic, effortless and displays higher value. Also, you’re fucked when you run out of material and aren’t much more than a dancing pattern monkey. However, certain topics are just more inherently suitable depending on gender. For example, if I talk to a girl about how to sink a rear naked choke on the knife edge of her radius, it is entertaining when well presented, but it’s naturally geared towards guys. A woman’s emotional circuitry is geared towards routines like Cube etc because they appeal to her intuition and her ability to gauge relationships, as the number of psychic ads at the back of any chics magazines will testify. As funny and as personally appealing as an “Escape the headlock” routine might be, it’d unsuitable and inflexible. Material that inherently appeals to her nature as a woman gives the PUA a platform to demonstrate the real value of his personality, which should be based on genuine passion if he’s to last longer than his material.

"If you are giving away things that have value for free, this is essentially a form of payment."

I don’t think free exists, there’s just the towards pleasure and away from pain principle and the endlessly subjective nature of the word “value”. I think what it really comes down to is how conscious are you of this ceaseless exchange of perceived value, how much of a good deal are you actually getting and how is this affecting everyone else.

I do, however, recognise the integrity demonstrated in your post Kowalski and I think that this quality makes a clunky win/lose transaction become a much more elegant win/win exchange with more jiggery pokery all round.