My experience with game

[yung.carl.jung]

"game theory" and the "underpinning philosophy" is mostly just post-rationalization of anecdotal experiences intertwined with the most bro-forcey, pseudo-scientific evolution mumbo jumbo there is. sorry. what this kind of philosophy is actually really good at is making someone feel a surge in their confidence, which when in turn explains why it "works". truth is all of game theory and its "philosophy" (which is never philosophy and always some pseudo paleo psychology garbage) deeply misogynistic and will, without any kind of doubt, make you form an unhealthy relationship with women. the ultimate cathartic moment for tha PUA community was when Neil Strauss (the guy who literally coined the term "game" in popular culture) came out and said that he was just a hedonistic sex addict trying to justify his own disgusting behavior to himself.

but game theory has its uses. it can help you get sex when you haven't had success. it gives you confidence: in your ability to pull, in your ability to please women, in your ability to manipulate others. however, when you're over that phase (pardon my smugness, I sound like zarathustra..) and you try to have an actually meaningful relationship, when you try to love someone and support them fully, and really invest yourself, then you realize that it's all toxic bullcrap that's poisoned your mind and your view of women to boot, and that you have to do a lot of re-programming, because newsflash: Female (human) psychology (and attraction!) is not reducible to some paleopsychological core, every women on god's green earth is different, no law of attraction is universal, people are much, much, much more influenced by society, culture, and first and foremost their individual experience than by anything else. there is literally no correct statement that goes: "all women are" unless the word that follows is "female" or something equally arbitrary.

there is no coherent theory of the female mind, and the people that fell for pua are the kind of people that think some bald dude without any accredetations can explain the world to them are just as likely to fall for flat-earthing or chemtrails, because those are just as plausible, and just as rooted in """science""". just my 2c

I will also say this: most women aren't stupid. women are actually capable of reading books. some women are aware of game theory. many women are aware of the mechanisms that some abuse to manipulate them. that doesn't mean that women are immune to them once they've "found the secret", it simply means that it'll become obvious that you're a manipulative ****. if you're looking for more than a short fling, or for a reasonably intelligent and aware partner, it's much better to make the choice to not see female (human in general) behavior in this degrading and frankly disgusting way, and see it for the complex mess that it is.

And girls I creeped out later came back to me.

this sounds so hilariously predatorial it made me burst out into laughter. im sure you did not mean it that way

 

[MaryKB]

I do see a lot of "social gaming" as exploitive or dishonest. For example, one is expected to show some interest in what others have to say. If someone else talks to me about, say, sports, or The Office, or her day in music class, I struggle to feign interest and usually try to find a way to gracefully change the topic or escape the conversation. I just can't trick them into thinking I care. Nor can I feign confidence, or feign friendliness, or do all these other acts of pretending we're expected to do.

I don't feel it's about trying to feign interest, but rather when you really take interest in someone else and what's important to her. I can completely understand how you don't have an interest in something your partner does, but caring about someone is also about caring what's important to her, and she'll likely be very upset when you refuse to talk about her interests and only change the subject. You're not going to only talk about mutual interests with another person, you'll share things important to you and she'll share things important to her, and together both of you will explore each other. You don't want to feign any of those things, someone would hope you'd really feel confident, and be friendly and not be pretending.

I have no interest in those same things you do lol, and I'd find it very boring talking about "The Office" (which I've tried to watch but just can't) But if it's important to him and I never want to listen to him talk about it, well he's not going to want to be with me, you know what I mean? Why would he? He'd have a whole part of his life that I'm not at all interested in sharing or learning about.

I couldn't care less about comic books, but my fiance loves them. And sometimes he wants to talk, so I listen to him tell me about all sorts of crazy things that make no sense to me, but it's an important part of his life and he takes great joy in sharing with me. And I learn about him by listening to what he's interested in, and while I'm never going to share his interest like he does, I take interest because I care about him.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

Actually, my approach of learning game was also a ton about coming to terms with myself. Kinda was part of a general spiritual journey, one might say. One key to success is to master your fears rather than have them master you. Because - approaching women you got the real hots for is scary. Especially when this is not something one is used to doing. Or if you actually find yourself not in their league etc. And while I am on the one hand in shape and tall (God I love being tall) and in general relatively good-looking, I am also chubby and got ***** tits. Especially them boobies really hurt my sexual confidence in the past. And unhandled insecurities are a game and seduction killer. (handled insecurities on the other hand can deepen the connection - makes it real and authentic and there is a place for vulnerability in seduction) So what I had to do was exactly to learn to be brutally honest with myself and just take things as they just are. I had to learn to be one with them, so they could no longer control or hinder me. And if you manage that, if you know your deficiencies and are genuinely cool with them, so that others also actually will not be able to use them to hurt you, but rather you don't mind making some good fun of it yourself - all in good measure of course - then this ups your game immensely.
I have literally experienced that hot girls have tested weather that is the case with me. They would test weather I am cool with my body for instance (illustration: that aforementioned 21-year old, just two weeks ago, mocked me for having bigger boobs than she does - well I do, and we had a good well-natured laugh about it - especially her laughter in that moment sounded like a sign of relieve - she was relieved I did not hold an inferiority complex about it - which would have been unpleasant and unattractive). If I had been insecure about it, they would have seen it, I would have experienced it like an attack, and I would have failed the test (women love love love to test). Instead, I passed the test, and they found me more attractive than ever before. What could have been my death sentence became another attribute which drew them to me. That is the fantastic thing about being a man - you can do so much with a genuine strong personality, way more than women.

In a nutshell - don't expect anyone to accept or be cool with which you do not accept and are not cool with. And girls will know, sooner or later.

Will do my piece later. I find it quite a challange to succinctly put it all into words.

the bolded sentence is just dumb. it's the kind of thing you write and then regret later (i hope)

most of this post has more to do with growing up and not being a little beach than it has with pua, at least imho. if that's the "underlying philosophy" for you then yeah, I bet many people would agree with you.. "don't get defensive about manboobs" is not really philosophy anyway, it's common sense but either way it's nice that you're so confident about your body, I sure have issues with mine

Lots of the "game" stuff actually deals with self improvement. Because part of the philosophy is that this all "works" best, if you don't try to score against the other person, but rather just have an interesting and nice time together. Which will make the other person just agree with you.
It's not using someone, if you both had a good time, and no other thoughts around it.

self improvement for the sake of "improving" or "scoring" is literally just vanity though and i'd hardly say it makes anybody grow as a person, especially when i look at my gymbros. if anything, their idea of self improvement made them worse people.

look, the attitude is kind of self-defeating. "don't think about scoring, that way you'll score!". you're still running after a goal..

EDIT: Part of "game" also deals with becoming interesting. The above mentioned talking techniques make you basically more interesting. Nothing wrong with that either, right?

but I think when you say "interesting" you really mean "desirable", and when you mean "desirable" you really mean "makes women choose you over another", which is really just part of the game, which is what people are constantly telling you. no person is inherently interesting, it's utterly subjective, that much we agree on, right?

you become a more interesting person by chasing your own passions, not via self-improvement. @Phrossack is utterly interesting to me. because he likes horses and old battleships and archery and has a generally unique outlook on life. I would be interested in him if I was a cute girl (hopefully in another life..? :lol ) would most women? I doubt it.

you're coming off as very defensive, I think, because at your core you realize that you're selling yourself short. you're already interesting, you always were, you just lacked presentation. every person is interesting to some degree because we all have a unique story and unique motivations. the kind of "interesting" that helps you pull is literally just social status and being confident. that's not interesting, that's superficial.

I do see a lot of "social gaming" as exploitive or dishonest. For example, one is expected to show some interest in what others have to say. If someone else talks to me about, say, sports, or The Office, or her day in music class, I struggle to feign interest and usually try to find a way to gracefully change the topic or escape the conversation. I just can't trick them into thinking I care. Nor can I feign confidence, or feign friendliness, or do all these other acts of pretending we're expected to do.

It's very hard to interpret rejection in a non-personal way, especially since I only ever try to talk to women by trying to discuss common interests jn a friendly way. If they don't like that, it isn't that they don't like the topic, but that they don't care for me specifically. How else am I to take that?
Thanks, but being myself has been a failed strategy for years now. Women just generally aren't into that. I'd have to be someone else entirely, but I refuse to do that since I figure no façade can last and it would be disappointing for both of us. The best move is sometimes not to play.

because it is dishonest. your problem is not the lack of social gaming skills, it's your apathy. sorry to be so blunt about it, but it's glaringly obvious. other people care about "the office" because it's about more than the office: it's about capitalism, it's about raltionships, about habit, about daily life, y'know, the things we all go through every day. these things are interesting to many people. I don't mean to fault you for that at all, and I don't want you to change, just trying to say that this is clearly the root of some of your ills.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

"And I certainly don't need to hit three clubs a week to get weekly fresh supply."

A "weekly fresh supply" of... what, exactly? What if nobody is willing to be the commodity that the OP wants to be supplied with?

I get a monthly supply of medications from my pharmacy. I just took delivery of a grocery order so I have a week's supply of milk, salad, fresh fruit, etc. and a supply of other things for a longer period of time (canned food, cat food, etc.). At no time would I ever consider a man to be anything I'd want as part of a "supply." As women are not commodities, neither are men.

I'm croggled that you can't see how offensive the concept is.

But we're in a world now where a babe thread is considered inappropriate.

I had a look through a few of them after becoming a moderator and someone in A&E raised a valid point about consistency in what would be allowed there vs. what was allowed in the Babe threads. As it turned out, a number of images crossed the line in both places and had to be deleted.

For the more recent rulings on such things, blame Google. They made a lot of forums clean up their images. There are a number of stills from various Star Trek episodes that can't be posted on a Star Trek forum as Google deems them "inappropriate" (although you can easily find them using Google Image Search).

 

[Lexicus]

I do see a lot of "social gaming" as exploitive or dishonest. For example, one is expected to show some interest in what others have to say. If someone else talks to me about, say, sports, or The Office, or her day in music class, I struggle to feign interest and usually try to find a way to gracefully change the topic or escape the conversation. I just can't trick them into thinking I care. Nor can I feign confidence, or feign friendliness, or do all these other acts of pretending we're expected to do.

I don't think that's really true, I don't think you owe people interest in what they have to say.

But I mean, if you want to know the problem here it's the assumptions underlying what you're saying. Why do you feel as though friendliness and confidence and interest in other people need to be feigned? Do you think other people are mostly just pretending to be confident, pretending to be friendly, pretending to find what other people say interesting? Part of this whole thing btw is that if you are talking to someone and they are saying nothing that interests you, walking away from that interaction with nothing further happening should not be regarded as a 'failure' in any way. That is why there should be no point in feigning interest.

there is no coherent theory of the female mind, and the people that fell for pua are the kind of people that think some bald dude without any accredetations can explain the world to them are just as likely to fall for flat-earthing or chemtrails, because those are just as plausible, and just as rooted in """science""". just my 2c

There are some coherent observations about the human mind that might be usefully applied to women though

 

[Farm Boy]

it's the kind of thing you write and then regret later

He will, if for no other reason than it is clearly untrue. Newfound self-confidence is intoxicating.

 

[AmazonQueen]

I have trouble talking about things I'm not interested in. The answer to that is usually to try and find common points of interest. If I try and talk to someone about whos an American football fanatic about American football I'm sure they will find me pretty superficial and boring, I don't know or care about the subject enough. If there is nothing we have in common I don't think theres much basis for a longterm relationship. Then again I haven't had a lot of success with long term relationships with men so I'm probably not best equipped to give relationship advice.

 

[Phrossack]

I don't feel it's about trying to feign interest, but rather when you really take interest in someone else and what's important to her. I can completely understand how you don't have an interest in something your partner does, but caring about someone is also about caring what's important to her, and she'll likely be very upset when you refuse to talk about her interests and only change the subject. You're not going to only talk about mutual interests with another person, you'll share things important to you and she'll share things important to her, and together both of you will explore each other. You don't want to feign any of those things, someone would hope you'd really feel confident, and be friendly and not be pretending.

I have no interest in those same things you do lol, and I'd find it very boring talking about "The Office" (which I've tried to watch but just can't) But if it's important to him and I never want to listen to him talk about it, well he's not going to want to be with me, you know what I mean? Why would he? He'd have a whole part of his life that I'm not at all interested in sharing or learning about.

I couldn't care less about comic books, but my fiance loves them. And sometimes he wants to talk, so I listen to him tell me about all sorts of crazy things that make no sense to me, but it's an important part of his life and he takes great joy in sharing with me. And I learn about him by listening to what he's interested in, and while I'm never going to share his interest like he does, I take interest because I care about him.

I don't mean to suggest I force conversations away from topics I don't like. More like I'm so selective because I want to avoid the awkwardness of having no common interests to talk about. I'd be fine dealing with a few uninteresting topics that mattered to someone I cared about, but I need common ground--a lot of it--before I'm willing to go that far. One of my past relationships loved the sound of her own voice and talking for hours about her music class and instruments, and that was doomed from the start in part because there were few other things she was willing to talk about and I had nothing to say about her favorite topics. Start with something in common and go from there is my preferred way.

 

[Lexicus]

More like I'm so selective because I want to avoid the awkwardness of having no common interests to talk about.

Why do you think this is awkward?

 

[yung.carl.jung]

I feel it's really disturbing how you'll see men so eager to defend another man, even when he's really creepy and predatory, and you'll often see guys doing this especially when a man is being challenged by a woman (like you can look at what happened with Brett Kavanaugh)

If you're having difficulties seeing what the problem is, you might want to listen more and talk down to people less? You're defending creepy predatory behavior, and you're dismissing people who are trying to help you understand.

I'm very sorry, I don't mean to be so harsh, but I found your reply to me to be very upsetting. I feel it's bad enough to have creepy predatory guys out there, and what makes it worse is when you also have other men who completely dismiss women's feelings and points of view and actively defend his behavior.
.

you're seeing a herd mentality here where there is none. The_J is just espousing his point of view, as is everyone else ITT. he is certainly not trying to defend the OP from women, that is not needed. I would not compare the dynamics of this thread with the dynamics of institutional abuse and rape, that's certainly a thing I wouldn't want to say about a fellow CFCer

those two guys were put on the spot and are just defending themselves, as would you if you were on the other side.

Why do you think this is awkward?

seeing any situation as inherently awkward, or seeing awkwardness as inherently bad are social ills of the last few centuries I feel. awkwardness doesn't exist for me. when I see it in other people, I revel in it. now that's creepy!

 

[AmazonQueen]

Why do you think this is awkward?

I can remember being set up on a date with someone by friends after my divorce. There were some long awkward silences between courses.
As far as I can tell he was a nice enough person but he wasn't interested in books, history, politics or gaming. I'm not interested in football or superhero movies. There were no hard feelings, we ended the evening politely enough but neither of us suggested a 2nd meeting.

 

[inthesomeday]

One time my mom was dating a guy and we were playing a board game and he and I were doing better than my mom and he said it was because women have a “spaghetti brain”. He sounded quite silly until he explained he meant that women have a harder time organizing and compartmentalizing things than men do.

Then he sounded even sillier.

 

[Lexicus]

I can remember being set up on a date with someone by friends after my divorce. There were some long awkward silences between courses.
As far as I can tell he was a nice enough person but he wasn't interested in books, history, politics or gaming. I'm not interested in football or superhero movies. There were no hard feelings, we ended the evening politely enough but neither of us suggested a 2nd meeting.

Okay, I can understand how that would be awkward. I asked that question because I wouldn't ask someone out in the first place if they had nothing to say that interested me.

 

[AmazonQueen]

Okay, I can understand how that would be awkward. I asked that question because I wouldn't ask someone out in the first place if they had nothing to say that interested me.

I've never been on a blind date since

 

[Lexicus]

I've never been on a blind date since

Yeah I've never had the stomach for that.

 

[Phrossack]

you become a more interesting person by chasing your own passions, not via self-improvement. @Phrossack is utterly interesting to me. because he likes horses and old battleships and archery and has a generally unique outlook on life. I would be interested in him if I was a cute girl (hopefully in another life..? :lol ) would most women? I doubt it.

Thanks, but this is exactly it. Most men don't share my interests, let alone women. There definitely are women my age in my area who share some of mine, thankfully, but they're sadly hard to come by.

because it is dishonest. your problem is not the lack of social gaming skills, it's your apathy. sorry to be so blunt about it, but it's glaringly obvious. other people care about "the office" because it's about more than the office: it's about capitalism, it's about raltionships, about habit, about daily life, y'know, the things we all go through every day. these things are interesting to many people. I don't mean to fault you for that at all, and I don't want you to change, just trying to say that this is clearly the root of some of your ills.

The Office was just an example I use because I've never seen it and most women my age in my area are obsessed with it to the exclusion of most other things. It gets grating hearing a quote for the thousandth time when the speaker thinks it's witty or original.

I really am apathetic towards most things most others find interesting. Sports, music, and TV/movies dominate casual conversation and I do not care about them. Conversations about them kind of leave me out because I have nothing to say and don't care to hear what others do.

I don't think that's really true, I don't think you owe people interest in what they have to say.

But I mean, if you want to know the problem here it's the assumptions underlying what you're saying. Why do you feel as though friendliness and confidence and interest in other people need to be feigned? Do you think other people are mostly just pretending to be confident, pretending to be friendly, pretending to find what other people say interesting? Part of this whole thing btw is that if you are talking to someone and they are saying nothing that interests you, walking away from that interaction with nothing further happening should not be regarded as a 'failure' in any way. That is why there should be no point in feigning interest.

Why do you think this is awkward?

If I get in a conversation, it's generally because I'm trying to be friendly or am interested in what the other has to say. If I don't care about what they say and they don't care about what I have to say, what exactly are we supposed to do? Just wait while they're talking for a chance to segue into a topic we do like? It's awkward sitting around not knowing what to talk about. Feigning interest is a social skill because it's rude to just let someone know you don't care about what they care about. But I see it as a dishonest waste of time. At the same time I can't just tell them I don't care about what they have to say.

So what do you do when you're in a conversation with someone new and it turns out you're bored with everything they have to say?

 

[yung.carl.jung]

Thanks, but this is exactly it. Most men don't share my interests, let alone women. There definitely are women my age in my area who share some of mine, thankfully, but they're sadly hard to come by.

The Office was just an example I use because I've never seen it and most women my age in my area are obsessed with it to the exclusion of most other things. It gets grating hearing a quote for the thousandth time when the speaker thinks it's witty or original.

I really am apathetic towards most things most others find interesting. Sports, music, and TV/movies dominate casual conversation and I do not care about them. Conversations about them kind of leave me out because I have nothing to say and don't care to hear what others do.

what I was trying to say is that your apathy towards everything besides your limited interests is not something innate to you as a person at all, but rather something you fabricated. you don't have to like The Office or TV sports, but you feel utterly indifferent to them. it's a spectrum, not black and white.

So what do you do when you're in a conversation with someone new and it turns out you're bored with everything they have to say?

you lead it into an interesting direction, i.e. their personal life or your personal life. if you're not interested in their personal life then there is little point talking about them.

do you like food? do you have favorite foods? everyone eats, everyone drinks. everyone has preferences. it's really not difficult if you think about it long enough, the problem is rather that most conversations remain shallow because people are afraid to delve deep.

I sometimes ask people about their favorite pets, childhood experiences, their relationship to their parents.. and sometimes people hate me for it, sometimes they have a cathartic experience. deeper conversation is really about taking risks, and it always begins with you making yourself vulnerable by showing a side of yourself others can attack, instead of being superficial like everyone else.

 

[red_elk]

I do see a lot of "social gaming" as exploitive or dishonest. For example, one is expected to show some interest in what others have to say. If someone else talks to me about, say, sports, or The Office, or her day in music class, I struggle to feign interest and usually try to find a way to gracefully change the topic or escape the conversation. I just can't trick them into thinking I care. Nor can I feign confidence, or feign friendliness, or do all these other acts of pretending we're expected to do.

There is no point in trying to feign confidence or interest if you don't have them already. Try to change topic, find something you both interested in. Ask her what books she read, what movies watch, where she went for vacation last time, etc. Usually there is something in common, otherwise may be she is just not your type?

Pretending to be someone else takes a lot of energy and doesn't work well. Manipulations also work ultimately against manipulator in most cases. Better line of behavior is to be honest and respectful to her and to yourself. Which is not as trivial as it sounds.

 

[Lexicus]

So what do you do when you're in a conversation with someone new and it turns out you're bored with everything they have to say?

I mean, as carl has pointed out you can take some measures to guide the conversation to things that may be more interesting. But if I've tried a bit of that and there's still nothing interesting they have to say (and I have to mention here that I'm often as least as interested in how people say things as in what they're talking about) I just make some polite excuse and walk away. Or just walk away when their friend comes up to talk to them and their attention goes away.

I'm envisioning this in a scenario where I've approached a woman in a bar, on the street, or at a party, something like that. Not when you sit down with someone for a blind date, I have no advice for such a trap

 

[Phrossack]

what I was trying to say is that your apathy towards everything besides your limited interests is not something innate to you as a person at all, but rather something you fabricated. you don't have to like The Office or TV sports, but you feel utterly indifferent to them. it's a spectrum, not black and white.



you lead it into an interesting direction, i.e. their personal life or your personal life. if you're not interested in their personal life then there is little point talking about them.

do you like food? do you have favorite foods? everyone eats, everyone drinks. everyone has preferences. it's really not difficult if you think about it long enough, the problem is rather that most conversations remain shallow because people are afraid to delve deep.

I sometimes ask people about their favorite pets, childhood experiences, their relationship to their parents.. and sometimes people hate me for it, sometimes they have a cathartic experience. deeper conversation is really about taking risks, and it always begins with you making yourself vulnerable by showing a side of yourself others can attack, instead of being superficial like everyone else.

I'm not equally apathetic towards everything outside my interests. For example, I have never read Harry Potter, or been interested in the Spanish language or Latin America, but I can see why others are and could get into them if my partner were.

I could watch The Office if my date wouldn't shut the whole thing down when I said I'd never seen it (the obsession here is stronger than you might think).

But sports or 99+% of music? These topics bore me so much my brain shuts off, or else I try to find an escape route from the conversation!

On my last date, things went okay. She was nice enough, we shared our travel experiences and stories about pets, but we just didn't click and that was that. I'd call that a failed date. It wasn't worth it; I learned nothing and spent time and money.