Hahaha get yersel doon the chippy plenty of lasses there
I think we diverted the thread again.
Sorry everyone this is what happens when you get English people who go abroad and they bump into each other. My fault .
Night night everyone
You’re only twenty aren’t you? Something like that? Don’t rush. You’ve got plenty of time. Friendship is a jewel. Focus on that.
This illustrates my basic problem with the whole PUA culture. Like most dumb ideas, it has a kernel of truth: women don’t like passive aggressive “nice guys” who sulk and write emo poetry. Have a backbone. But besides taking it to a ridiculous extreme where you’re encouraged to be an abrasive jerk, it tries to reduce human interaction into this “system” with specialized terms and acroynms. It’s like a video game nerd trying to use a cheat code. You can tell the whole thing was invented by some dork attempting to reverse engineer confidence and self assurance and landing on “peacocking” and “negging.” Someone who is genuinely confident and comfortable in his own skin doesn’t get wrapped up in an Internet subculture based on trying to clinicially dissect girls like they’re an alien race.
I mean, yes, obviously do the best you can with what nature gave you. Work out and don’t smell bad. But that hardly needs to be said.
I’ve only been in that situation twice in my life. The first was with the woman I would marry (badly!) and another with a woman who would become my fiance, but we eventually broke up.
Both times I took the initiative to ask “Will you be my girlfriend?” and both times I had to pluck up some courage.
I’m just curious whether people have found this to be the norm - one (the man?) taking the initiative to ask and where “No” is a possibility, or does it just become obvious after a while, or they agree quite easily?
I suspect the first time I asked was premature and I should have allowed the relationship to grow, and probably fail, before throwing us both into something we regretted.
If I had my twenties again I would date more girls and have one or two “girlfriends”, including the drama of breaking up, instead of staying single for years and then going to a committed relationship in just weeks. As I said in a previous post I was “too serious” as a person, and this was one manifestation of that characteristic.
I think eventually the man needs to be clear that he wants to be boyfriend/girlfriend, and he shouldn’t keep things in limbo for too long. Boyfriend/girlfriend isn’t a massive committment yet, but does imply exclusively dating each other. This is important to a woman because the longer a guy seems to be avoiding going from “dating” to “please be my girlfriend”, the more paranoid she will become that he isn’t that interested in her.
Thanks! A very helpful reply. You seem to say the relationship is “in limbo” until an agreement is reached, and it’s not necessarily obvious without communicating it.
That is so important to remember! I would advise young people to both not be afraid of this “commitment”, and similarly not be afraid to break it off.
I didn’t read all the replies so excuse me if my answers have been mentioned earlier.
You can be a great Catholic guy, but if you come across as weird or awkward…many may not want to go out with you. Many referring to girls you simply come across. Most girls I know (myself included) would not go out with a guy they just met. A lot of them want some sort of build-up (I. E. The mini friendship stage where they can evaluate you to see if you would be a good match).
So perhaps you can focus on that. Most girls do not view dates so casually too. A lot of us, boys and girls, are not used to the idea of one-on-one outings with someone we barely know. It takes a lot of interest and attraction for them to say yes.
A guy recently asked me out (through Instagram, the horror) and while he made it clear he’s not asking to jump into a relationship, I turned him down because I don’t know aaaannnything about him besides his name. I know men complain about the friend zone but honestly, don’t undermine the importance of being friends first.
Because in the girl’s perspective, you asking her for a date is an indicator of your romantic/sexual attraction to her. And if that’s not true, then why ask her out? It’s not something she can easily ignore and go back to being friends, if that makes sense.
Also with all due respect and love to Sarah Swafford and speakers like her, they are often attractive and already married people. They’re probably looking at it from the eyes of a guy asking his future spouse for a date. Rather than a guy who has constantly been rejected and is asking a woman who won’t end up as his spouse. I do remember Matt Fradd telling the women at a Seek talk to just say yes and that it wasn’t that serious though. Although I think most women still wouldn’t say yes unless they’re attracted to you.
See this is what kind of annoys me. I don’t even necessarily disagree with you about PUAs and Pickup Culture in general, but it really seems like everyone misses the point as soon as anything related to Pickup is mentioned.
Yes, Pickup is pretty much a “dork” reverse engineering picking up women. But then again, what else could it possibly be? Cool, attractive guys don’t need “techniques”. They can pretty much just smile and the attraction is already there, as soon as they make contact with a woman. She might turn them down in the end, but they’re foot was always in the door. Saying
“Oh Pickup is only for dorks!”
Is not a serious criticism.
As for reducing it all down to just “peacocking” and “negging” that also misses the point. Pickup is, more than anything, a psychological theory about women in general. And while it may go too far in some areas and be misguided in others, it actually does make a great deal of sense and in practice it can help EVERY man understand women better.
I get that PUAs are low hanging fruit, especially whenever women are around, and makong fun of them always gets a clap or two, but given the quality of dating advice “dorks” get from the media, from mainstream websites, from their parents, and from threadsike this, I definitely see the value that Pickup brings to the table. If nothing else, it breaks the echo chamber and provides a radically different theory.
Ultimately, the only real problem with Pickup is that it is gynocentric. Ironically, as gynocentric as feminism. Just the other side of the same coin.
I haven’t read any of this thread @Sarcelle , so I don’t know what prompts the post .
Not to worry , but - - - - - - -
Certain techniques can be useful because ultimately, they can simply be ways on how to initiate a conversation that both sexes can actually utilize.
However, a lot of their techniques and beliefs that manipulate or put down women can be against Christianity (duh). It’s better to advise someone against the community so they won’t be sucked into it. That’s the main problem with it. It’s manipulation and/or uncharitable views towards women. It’s better to just call it out immediately.
Also PU culture is obviously gynocentric because it’s all about picking up women in the first place, so it’s not a surprise. Even mgtow cliques fall into this because they’re constantly talking (uncharitably) about women and what they want.
I get that not everyone is blessed with Mario Lopezian dimples and we need advice for Joe Everyman. The problem is the type of guy who is going to be attracted to a system like this is likely the type of guy who is already obsessive and neurotic and hyper-analytical. It reinforces the worst tendencies of its target audience. This is the last guy who needs to be rushing back to report to his internet friends how many times per minute he touched a girls forearm. I used to post on another forum regularly and someone started a thread making fun of PUAs. They would visit a PUA forum, screenshot comments, and post them for general hilarity. Granted, I’m sure they were cherrypicking the most ridiculous ones, but the amount of hyper-analytical dorkery was insane. Guys were breaking down basic interactions that most functional adults should be able to handle on autopilot like it was the D-Day landing. Not to mention there was a real dark Eliot Rogers/incel/“I hate women” tone to a lot of the posts.
Besides, and I agree this is low hanging fruit, it’s just annoying as a subculture, with all the crazy terms and acronyms to explain relatively simple, common sense ideas. Do we really need a term for “try to look as good as genetics will allow”?
My real beef with the PUA stuff is that it takes some decent points and then pushes them to an extreme. “Don’t be a doormat” becomes “exploit her insecurities and use them to manipulate her.” “Don’t waste time on a girl who is clearly not interested” becomes “if a girl ever cancels a date, she is forever anathema.”
For us it was simply an organic thing. As we grew closer, we each stopped dating other people. That was almost 30 years ago.
Thinking about women as sex vending machines or robots with “hypergamy” programming is not a healthy way to think about women. It is certainly anti-Christian, given that so many of our moral teachings boil down to “Other people are people, just like you. Treat them as such.” PUA techniques, and the whole “manosphere” attitude, encourage the sin of lust in the pure sense — not the “I thought about sexy stuff” that most people obsess over, but literally treating other people as objects for your use and pleasure. Obviously the incel movement is the worst of the worst, being what happens when the previously mentioned obsessive dorks find PUA techniques insufficient and yet still buy into the underlying theory about how women work, but you can see it all over the place.
They call women femoids, which imply women are robots or appliances which one can hack.
Now that’s what I call a red pill.
I think the prevalence of pornography further exploits this mentality and makes it the natural conclusion about women for a lot of guys
Instead of trying to find ways to manipulate women into going out with them, perhaps the dorks should find ways to be less dorky. It’s really not that hard, and it’s pretty satisfying, because the traits that women who are worth marrying want in a man are the same traits which are most satisfying for a man to acquire.