Spiral dynamics stages in women, stage orange and relationships, etc.

[Leo Gura]

@Emerald Nope, not Shinzen.

Gaydar? Lol

P.S. Careful with spreading rumors.

[Emerald]

11 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

@Emerald Nope, not Shinzen.

Gaydar? Lol

P.S. Careful with spreading rumors.

I'm not trying to spread rumors about him. I just always thought that he was. It was the impression that I got mostly because of his mannerisms. So, when you were talking about the other yogi, I thought that you might have been referring to him because Shinzen was in a lot of videos with an attractive woman.

So, I was like, "Well, that would make sense." But for the record, I am not saying that Shinzen Young is definitely gay or bringing it up just to stir up controversy or something. It was just my genuine first impression of him. 

[Capital]

Rsd Tyler is an example of a half green half orange pua guy .. I think he is more green now than orange tho .. RSD Julien on the other hand is fully orange .. he is a typical orange .. although now he transcended to be more green .. but the old rsd Julien is a typical orange pua guy .

Edited July 2, 2018 by Capital

[fireworld]

1 hour ago, Leo Gura said:

@Emerald Nope, not Shinzen.

Gaydar? Lol

P.S. Careful with spreading rumors.

Leo, we know from research that women are extremely attracted to men who are higher status than them, and that women are hypergamous by nature. Atleast the science backs these claims up, also don't most stage green guys get friendzoned immediately since women have a quite clear attraction strategy? 

 

[Emerald]

1 minute ago, fireworld said:

Leo, we know from research that women are extremely attracted to men who are higher status than them, and that women are hypergamous by nature. Atleast the science backs these claims up, also don't most stage green guys get friendzoned immediately since women have a quite clear attraction strategy? 

 

Women don't have an attraction strategy. They're just intuitively attracted to whoever happens to strike their fancy. It's a total Cupid's Arrow. But for women, context matters. When I start getting an attraction to a guy, I go into many fantasies about spending time with him and how he might react and what it might entail. So, if I imagine that I can have a lot of good emotions and experiences with a guy I will develop an attraction that that one guy. So, because many Orange women desire status, their fantasies are probably centered around the status a man can bring to her life. A Blue woman might fantasize about marriage and settling down. But Green women don't care about that to much. It's all about the potential for intimacy, having similar interests, and mutual exploration. 

[fireworld]

1 minute ago, Emerald said:

Women don't have an attraction strategy. They're just intuitively attracted to whoever happens to strike their fancy. It's a total Cupid's Arrow. But for women, context matters. When I start getting an attraction to a guy, I go into many fantasies about spending time with him and how he might react and what it might entail. So, if I imagine that I can have a lot of good emotions and experiences with a guy I will develop an attraction that that one guy. So, because many Orange women desire status, their fantasies are probably centered around the status a man can bring to her life. A Blue woman might fantasize about marriage and settling down. But Green women don't care about that to much. It's all about the potential for intimacy, having similar interests, and mutual exploration. 

The problem with that statement though is that the evidence clearly shows that women do in FACT have sexual strategies that they employ. Attraction is not random, it is highly predictable if you read the work of John Gottman and of the research done by David M Buss.

I am afraid that ignoring the reality of sexuality is one of the things that stage greens like to do, just like they like to ignore the reality of many other areas of life.

How do you determine who strikes your fancy? Why do for example manipulations of a mans status greatly increase his match percentage on dating sites and so on? I do believe that the evidence is extremely strong that women do have not one but 2 sexual strategies that they have used for millenia that are deeply embedded in their primal brain. 

 

[Leo Gura]

16 minutes ago, fireworld said:

don't most stage green guys get friendzoned immediately since women have a quite clear attraction strategy?

Friendzoning is independent of your Spiral color. Guys of all colors get friendzoned, and only because they are clueless about pulling the trigger and escalating.

Friendzoning is never going to be a problem if you just learn a bit about flirting with girls.

[Emerald]

14 minutes ago, fireworld said:

The problem with that statement though is that the evidence clearly shows that women do in FACT have sexual strategies that they employ. Attraction is not random, it is highly predictable if you read the work of John Gottman and of the research done by David M Buss.

I am afraid that ignoring the reality of sexuality is one of the things that stage greens like to do, just like they like to ignore the reality of many other areas of life.

How do you determine who strikes your fancy? Why do for example manipulations of a mans status greatly increase his match percentage on dating sites and so on? I do believe that the evidence is extremely strong that women do have not one but 2 sexual strategies that they have used for millenia that are deeply embedded in their primal brain. 

Listen, neither John Gottman nor David M Buss have as much experience with being a woman as I do.  I have almost thirty years of experience with this vehicle. So, I don't have any strategies that I consciously employ in developing an attraction to a particular man. It comes about intuitively and out of nowhere.

Usually, what happens is I know a guy, and he's just a guy to me, just like anyone else. Then, I think about him one day and realize that I feel really good when I think about him. Then, I want to think about him more and be around him more. So, it's just the presence of positive romantic and sexual emotions that make me attracted to a guy.

So, I would say that women's attractions to men are more holistic. No single trait will guarantee that a woman will be attracted to any guy. It's more that a man is more than just the sum of his parts and has a magic pull to him, that only I can see. That said, there can be deal breakers that get in the way of an attraction.

For example, if I start to get an attraction to a man and imagine that he's a really warm-hearted guy and start admiring for that, then I see him kick a puppy. Well, the illusion is broken and he loses the magic. 

*Also note: For me (and maybe many others) All men begin in the friend-zone. They aren't consciously put there. Most just never make their way out of the friend-zone. 

Edited July 2, 2018 by Emerald

[fireworld]

1 minute ago, Emerald said:

Listen, neither John Gottman nor David M Buss have as much experience with being a woman as I do.  I have almost thirty years of experience with this vehicle. So, I don't have any strategies that I consciously employ in developing an attraction to a particular man. It comes about intuitively and out of nowhere.

Usually, what happens is I know a guy, and he's just a guy to me, just like anyone else. Then, I think about him one day and realize that I feel really good when I think about him. Then, I want to think about him more and be around him more. So, it's just the presence of positive romantic and sexual emotions that make me attracted to a guy.

So, I would say that women's attractions to men are more holistic. No single trait will guarantee that a woman will be attracted to any guy. It's more that a man is more than just the sum of his parts and has a magic pull to him, that only I can see. That said, there can be deal breakers that get in the way of an attraction.

For example, if I start to get an attraction to a man and imagine that he's a really warm-hearted guy and start admiring for that, then I see him kick a puppy. Well, the illusion is broken and he loses the magic.

 

I understand what you are saying, and I am deeply appreciative of what you are contributing to my understanding of women. However, there are structures within the brain that "cause" the emotion of love and attraction. Love cannot and will never be unconditional since the health and the survival of our offspring depends on us doing it right.

You cannot find a man sexually attractive and want to have his children if he is a sickly man, if he is an underdeveloped man, if he is a emotionally damaged man since your children will either not survive birth or will survive but will be left with grave deformities and challanges in their lives. And mother nature will cut them off from earth and your genes forever.

Sexual attraction is fired off by a pattern recognizing system in the brain, if this wasn't the case, or if you had a faulty system you would be sexually attracted to underdeveloped humans, or to 80+ year old men. Therefore, in order for your brain to produce the emotion of sexual attraction in you, you have to notice things like, symmetrical feautres of the body, intelligence(which men display through humour), emotional health like kindness and so on. 

Even the way that the brain is organized in men and women is for the reason of identifying healthy mates for reproduction and survival. The idea that love is unconditional and random sounds great, but it's a stage green relativistic view, one with an extremely bad track record at that.

John Gottman and David Buss just do research, most of the people coming out with this data are women actually, NOT men. So it's other women who work with these men that have created these models, not just a group of dudes. However, I am deeply appreactive of what you have said and it makes me think.

 

[Emerald]

15 minutes ago, fireworld said:

I understand what you are saying, and I am deeply appreciative of what you are contributing to my understanding of women. However, there are structures within the brain that "cause" the emotion of love and attraction. Love cannot and will never be unconditional since the health and the survival of our offspring depends on us doing it right.

You cannot find a man sexually attractive and want to have his children if he is a sickly man, if he is an underdeveloped man, if he is a emotionally damaged man since your children will either not survive birth or will survive but will be left with grave deformities and challanges in their lives. And mother nature will cut them off from earth and your genes forever.

Sexual attraction is fired off by a pattern recognizing system in the brain, if this wasn't the case, or if you had a faulty system you would be sexually attracted to underdeveloped humans, or to 80+ year old men. Therefore, in order for your brain to produce the emotion of sexual attraction in you, you have to notice things like, symmetrical feautres of the body, intelligence(which men display through humour), emotional health like kindness and so on. 

Even the way that the brain is organized in men and women is for the reason of identifying healthy mates for reproduction and survival. The idea that love is unconditional and random sounds great, but it's a stage green relativistic view, one with an extremely bad track record at that.

John Gottman and David Buss just do research, most of the people coming out with this data are women actually, NOT men. So it's other women who work with these men that have created these models, not just a group of dudes. However, I am deeply appreactive of what you have said and it makes me think.

Like I said female sexuality is generally holistic, but there can be dealbreakers and barriers to attraction as well. So, the particular traits work together to create something greater than the sum of its parts. But that doesn't mean that the attraction is unconditional and that the parts don't matter. In fact, it's extremely conditional. This is why women are a lot pickier than men. 

For example, I'm only attracted one guy at time. That's the only way for the attraction to be emotionally potent because the meaningfulness of the attraction adds to the aphrodisiac effect that the man has on me. If I'm attracted to two guys at once, it's like I feel 1/8 the effect of the aphrodisiac toward both of them combined as I would toward just one guy. And if I'm not through the moon for a guy the emotional payoff of dating him or being intimate with him is tepid at best and depressing at worst. 

But yes, the reptilian brain is also involved in attraction. But that isn't a conscious strategy that women employ. From the subjective experience, attraction either arises for no conscious reason or doesn't arise for no conscious reason. I'm not saying biology is null in this whole intuitive mix. It's part of the mix. But as an individual woman, it just comes on like a Cupid's Arrow. 

Edited July 2, 2018 by Emerald

[fireworld]

1 minute ago, Emerald said:

But yes, the reptilian brain is also involved in attraction. But that isn't a conscious strategy that women employ. From the subjective experience, attraction either arises for no conscious reason or doesn't arise for now conscious reason. I'm not saying biology is null in this whole intuitive mix. It's part of the mix. But as an individual woman, it just comes on like a Cupid's Arrow. 

 

Yes, yes, I see more of what you are saying. I must admit I love mental models and like to use them as they are extremely effictive in my life.

The thing you said about it not being a concious strategy is the exact reason why Pick-Up actually works on women. Because you can learn to generate these emotions in a woman unconciously and she will feel like it just happened. What you just said is the exact thing that advanced Pickup artists get all the time. They even warn you in pickup, dont come across like you have an agenda, let her fall in love when you are not there.

Let me ask you then, if you are with a guy and you starting finding him very attractive does it make you more attracted to him if he is very emotional/spiritual?

Speaking as a man, I have tried to be a "nice" guy or whatever, but it extremely rarely ever works. Which is why I am asking Leo or anyone else for ideas of why this could be? Why do women not find it attractive if you treat them very well and romance them even if you do it in a non needy way?

The problem with this aswell is that women tend to mislead men, you may feel inclined to respond "Well ofcourse women do respond to nice guys, you just haven't found the right one" but again, all the evidence shows the contrary. You can even test this in nightclubs, you can approach 100 women being a jackass and you will get 15-20% of their numbers, you can approach 100 women with a compliment and a nice smile and you will get resistance like you are Sisyphus carrying that damn stone haha.

I actually deeply understand the models of attraction and have been in the pickup field for over 10 years, but still to this day it amazes me that there seems to be an extreme level of cognitive dissonance in what women actually say the are attracted to and what they respond to. 

For example, a male friend can exhibit all the traits of a wonderful guy with all the traits she wants, but that woman will ignore her friend whom she knows likes her for a jackass. 

I understand why this happens, but how do you as a woman explain it?

 

[Emerald]

7 minutes ago, fireworld said:

 

Yes, yes, I see more of what you are saying. I must admit I love mental models and like to use them as they are extremely effictive in my life.

The thing you said about it not being a concious strategy is the exact reason why Pick-Up actually works on women. Because you can learn to generate these emotions in a woman unconciously and she will feel like it just happened. What you just said is the exact thing that advanced Pickup artists get all the time. They even warn you in pickup, dont come across like you have an agenda, let her fall in love when you are not there.

Let me ask you then, if you are with a guy and you starting finding him very attractive does it make you more attracted to him if he is very emotional/spiritual?

Speaking as a man, I have tried to be a "nice" guy or whatever, but it extremely rarely ever works. Which is why I am asking Leo or anyone else for ideas of why this could be? Why do women not find it attractive if you treat them very well and romance them even if you do it in a non needy way?

The problem with this aswell is that women tend to mislead men, you may feel inclined to respond "Well ofcourse women do respond to nice guys, you just haven't found the right one" but again, all the evidence shows the contrary. You can even test this in nightclubs, you can approach 100 women being a jackass and you will get 15-20% of their numbers, you can approach 100 women with a compliment and a nice smile and you will get resistance like you are Sisyphus carrying that damn stone haha.

I actually deeply understand the models of attraction and have been in the pickup field for over 10 years, but still to this day it amazes me that there seems to be an extreme level of cognitive dissonance in what women actually say the are attracted to and what they respond to. 

For example, a male friend can exhibit all the traits of a wonderful guy with all the traits she wants, but that woman will ignore her friend whom she knows likes her for a jackass. 

I understand why this happens, but how do you as a woman explain it?

 

My attractions have always largely been about projecting some latent aspect of myself onto him. And in having connection with him, I feel more myself. So, for me, I tend to be attracted to reserved men who I imagine to have a lot of depth to them. And I like men who have a heart and are interested in deep things like art, psychology, spirituality, etc. I like a man who is just as much playful as he is capable fo being intellectual and serious. And I like a man with subtle un-pretended masculinities who is very cool headed and warm-hearted at the same time. And when I fantasize about being with them, I imagine that they are both emotionally aware (aka sensitive) enough to understand me and to be able to carry on a conversation with me about topics that I'm interested in. If I feel like he won't understand the things I'm interested in or be able to carry on a deep conversation with me, it's deal-breaker. 

So, for me personally, I like guys who already embody traits that I want for myself. So, if a man has a high degree of equanimity and peacefulness to his personality, I will tend to admire him because I aspire to that. Or if a man is okay with himself and doesn't need a lot of theatrics, I will tend to admire him because I aspire to that. And if a guy is reserved, I can also project qualities that I want in myself onto him, even if he doesn't have them. So, allowing for some silence can work in your favor.

But if you wonder why women who you're not romantically involved with don't respond with attraction to niceness, it's because niceness is very basic and just not that much of a turn-on. It's just the absence of a deal-breaker in my book. Now, warm-heartedness and compassion are different. Those are much less common than niceness and deeper than niceness. They are also like a breath of fresh air. 

But if a man is into spirituality. That's good because we have a common interest. That said, there's no guarantee that his interest in spirituality will lead to an attraction.

Now, with regard to a man being emotional, I would exchange emotional with emotionally sensitive or emotionally aware. Emotional to me means unstable and volatile. Basically, a man who can't control himself and has emotional outbursts and a lot of rage.

Conversely, if a man is tuned into his own feelings and has a high degree of empathy and emotional awareness, it is one the sexiest things ever. That means that the man is capable of a level of intimacy that is rare to find in a man, because they fear seeming weak. So, it also means that he's comfortable enough in his masculinity to embody a trait that's typically seen as feminine. 

But again, women's attractions are highly selective and counter-intuitive. They don't have to do with any one particular trait or even a laundry list of all the "right" traits. It's more about chemistry, projection, luck, and context. So, your friend's crush probably just didn't want the experience of being with him because the Cupid's Arrow just didn't strike. But she probably liked the other guy because he was more mysterious, and she probably projected a lot onto him before she realized that he was an ass. 

The best advice I can give you is to rid yourself of deal-breakers and to know your strengths and interests. Be authentic and unapologetic about yourself. Also, perhaps plant a subtle seed that tilts her mind in a romantic direction in a very ambiguous way, but immediately go back to being platonic. Then, give her some space and time for her mind to do what it is (or isn't) going to do. The ambiguity may get her interested in what's going on in your mind, so that she wants to know more. But less is more.

 

[fireworld]

11 minutes ago, Emerald said:

 

Conversely, if a man is tuned into his own feelings and has a high degree of empathy and emotional awareness, it is one the sexiest things ever. That means that the man is capable of a level of intimacy that is rare to find in a man, because they fear seeming weak. So, it also means that he's comfortable enough in his masculinity to embody a trait that's typically seen as feminine. 

But again, women's attractions are highly selective and counter-intuitive. They don't have to do with any one particular trait or even a laundry list of all the "right" traits. It's more about chemistry, projection, luck, and context. So, your friend's crush probably just didn't want the experience of being with him because the Cupid's Arrow just didn't strike. But she probably liked the other guy because he was more mysterious, and she probably projected a lot onto him before she realized that he was an ass. 

The best advice I can give you is to rid yourself of deal-breakers and to know your strengths and interests. Be authentic and unapologetic about yourself. Also, perhaps plant a subtle seed that tilts her mind in a romantic direction in a very ambiguous way, but immediately go back to being platonic. Then, give her some space and time for her mind to do what it is (or isn't) going to do. The ambiguity may get her interested in what's going on in your mind, so that she wants to know more. But less is more.

 

Okok, so for example if a guy opens up to you about some very deep emotional thing and makes you feel his emotions very strongly, does that make you feel attracted? Or is it that he gets you to talk about your emotions and asks the good questions and is empathic to you? What happens to you if he becomes emotional and actually displays a real weakness like neediness? 

What if a guy says "You are so beautiful every part of me fears losing you to someone else?" A line like that may be emotionally aware but at the same time is displaying weakness and neediness.

Is there a difference between that or when a guy says something like "Out of all the women that I have ever seen, only you make me feel safe again?" This may be emotionally aware but doesn't display neediness at all?

The intimacy you mention, how do you know he is capable of it?

How is compassion and warm-heartedness different from niceness?

I must admit that I usually avoid this, but one time I did start talking about very emotional things with a woman in bed and I told her something that i thought was weak but her emotional reaction to it was extremely strong. Also i tried the cheesy thing with poetry thinking she would start laughing but it worked haha. I told her that behind every piece of art and poetry is the inspiration of a woman just as beautiful as her.

Also you keep on mentioning Cupids Arrow, do you believe in it and how do you relate to it?

Jeez, you ran straight into an interview here haha.

 

 

 

 

[Emerald]

48 minutes ago, fireworld said:

Okok, so for example if a guy opens up to you about some very deep emotional thing and makes you feel his emotions very strongly, does that make you feel attracted? Or is it that he gets you to talk about your emotions and asks the good questions and is empathic to you? What happens to you if he becomes emotional and actually displays a real weakness like neediness? 

What if a guy says "You are so beautiful every part of me fears losing you to someone else?" A line like that may be emotionally aware but at the same time is displaying weakness and neediness.

Is there a difference between that or when a guy says something like "Out of all the women that I have ever seen, only you make me feel safe again?" This may be emotionally aware but doesn't display neediness at all?

The intimacy you mention, how do you know he is capable of it?

How is compassion and warm-heartedness different from niceness?

I must admit that I usually avoid this, but one time I did start talking about very emotional things with a woman in bed and I told her something that i thought was weak but her emotional reaction to it was extremely strong. Also i tried the cheesy thing with poetry thinking she would start laughing but it worked haha. I told her that behind every piece of art and poetry is the inspiration of a woman just as beautiful as her.

Also you keep on mentioning Cupids Arrow, do you believe in it and how do you relate to it?

Jeez, you ran straight into an interview here haha.

I guess it all depends on his tone and body posture when he says it, and if it feel appropriate for the situation. It's more of having acuity for what's appropriate in a given situation. Also, if it feels contrived in any way or too cinematic or performed; it'll make me feel super awkward. Like, I'll be super aware and go into my head like, 'I think he's in his head right now. Trying to crack the code.' It tells me he's not really being present and isn't really secure in just being a human with me. Plus, it steals me out of the present too.

Now, if I'm super attracted to him, I will love everything that he's saying to me, just because it's him that's saying it. The guy could probably say some Pinky from Pinky and the Brain level stuff, and I would find it just charming. But if my attraction is just developing, that might feel like a bit too much pressure. But these words won't make me more attracted unless I'm already very attracted. 

But I get an intuitive sense for if a man is capable of intimacy. It's about how he carries himself and how he acts and speaks. But it is just a projection at first too. But his affectations will be a pretty good indicator if he feels secure enough in himself to be intimate with someone else. Basically, if a guy seems like he has a chip on his shoulder, it'll clue me into some potential barriers to intimacy. 

Also, niceness is very non-active. It's just a very normal and general mode of behavior. Kind of like a clerk at a grocery store. They can be nice, but you wouldn't necessarily say that someone with surface level niceness is compassionate or particularly empathetic, emotionally sensitive, or warmhearted. Nice is an easy mask to wear. But the others take some skill, depth, and wisdom. They're more admirable traits.

As for believing in the Cupid's Arrow, not literally. But I think the myth comes from the way that an attraction strikes women, and occasionally men. My attractions really have come up due to no logical reason. It's just that I start inexplicably start intensely liking someone and wanting to be around them because it produces the best emotions ever.

Like imagine your body got a little hit of ecstasy every time you thought about or interacted with a particular person. And that was the only person who gave you that feeling. No one else pushes the ecstasy button but that person. That's what my attractions have been. And they come along only once in a very great while. 

But again, you're always kind of playing the lotto to a certain degree if you're trying to get a woman to fall in love with you to that depth. You can try every trick in the book, and if it doesn't happen it just won't.

But you can increase your chances by being an awesome person in general and getting rid of deal breakers and being aware of how female attraction works. But the one you want may never be interested. Which is a difficult truth to handle. But someone will be, and they will like you very intensely just because you're you. You won't have to act any which way. 

But if you're just interested in pick-up or something like that, you don't really need a woman to fall in love with you. There are a ton of women who are just looking for a good time, who aren't interested in (or sometimes not even capable of) deeper attractions. In which case, you can learn some techniques and be relatively successful for one-night-stands and brief flings. 

But if you're looking for intimacy and a real relationship with another human being, it's important to understand what makes them tick. It's also helpful to know how random it is. A lot of guys will feel like they messed something up or that something is wrong with them if a girl doesn't have an attraction to them. Guys tend to be attracted to lots of women based on looks mostly, so they might assume women are also attracted to lots of men and that the lame men get put into the friend zone. But it doesn't work that way.

Everyone in the world (except maybe Edward Norton... just sayin') starts in the friend zone. But usually only one makes it out. Maybe a few, if a woman isn't quite as pointed with her attractions as I am. But it's a really intuitive process and the choice happens on a subconscious level. 

 

Edited July 2, 2018 by Emerald

[Girzo]

9 hours ago, Brittany said:

I have not seen any non-duality teacher, philosopher, or psychology do this subject justice.

Check out OSHO's books about love. They are gold.

[Sparkist]

@Emerald

@fireworld (if I have read this correctly) is mining your knowledge of women for pick ups, not meaningful relationships (correct me if I'm wrong). The whole world of PUA is about manipulation and deception in order to obtain sex. He is being given deep insight into the authentic female psyche, by a very intelligent and emotionally aware woman, on the basis that he will use it for shallow means. What have a woken up to? 

 

[Key Elements]

@Elisabeth To me, I feel that one of the major things missing is that many ppl in a stage orange society forgot to pass through stage blue. Stage blue has to do with setting boundaries. I totally agree that too much blue boundaries is unhealthy, but I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about healthy boundaries. If you look at different religions and cultures across the world at the stage blue level, they all have their own types of boundaries. The thing is, which boundaries do you want to keep and not want to change in a relationship? This is something for the individual to contemplate on.

[Sea]

1 hour ago, Sparkist said:

@Emerald

@fireworld (if I have read this correctly) is mining your knowledge of women for pick ups, not meaningful relationships (correct me if I'm wrong). The whole world of PUA is about manipulation and deception in order to obtain sex. He is being given deep insight into the authentic female psyche, by a very intelligent and emotionally aware woman, on the basis that he will use it for shallow means. What have a woken up to? 

 

All he has been told in essence is that attraction is random and out of his control. How is it even possible to "use" that information for anything?

[fireworld]

1 hour ago, Sparkist said:

@Emerald

@fireworld (if I have read this correctly) is mining your knowledge of women for pick ups, not meaningful relationships (correct me if I'm wrong). The whole world of PUA is about manipulation and deception in order to obtain sex. He is being given deep insight into the authentic female psyche, by a very intelligent and emotionally aware woman, on the basis that he will use it for shallow means. What have a woken up to? 

 

What's wrong with pickup even if it may at times be shallow?

Her model of attraction and her subjective experience is interesting as it affirms many of the things that pickup teaches already.

I ask all my female friends about it to gain a deeper understanding of women. I even ask girlfriends about their experiences so I can be a better boyfriend. 

So what? Not everyone needs to be after a deep meaningful relationship in order to not be bad, what's wrong with a fling? 

Stop moralising.

I do pickup and have since 2007.

[fireworld]

33 minutes ago, Sea said:

All he has been told in essence is that attraction is random and out of his control. How is it even possible to "use" that information for anything?

Attraction is not out of your control, you cannot control all variables in attraction. But you can control many critical pieces in attraction.

Things like humor, confidence, your style, your status and how you interact with the woman all matter when creating attraction.

This notion that you shouldn't "use" information is only bad if you are misleading the woman and being a Jackass. If you are using her as a sex toy or something crazy like that.

But if you are a guy and you find out that women feel great when you are empathic and intimate emotionally why not use that information to give your woman a fuller and happier relationship with you?

I just don't buy the bullshit that you shouldn't learn about love and attraction.

It's a great way to end up lonely and miserable. Look at how most couples are unhappy with each other, they should all have to learn about each others processes to gain mutual understanding and deepening of their relationships.

It's always better to know the truth and have the most accurate mental model than it is to appeal to some ridiculous idea of morality. IMHO.