Sunday, June 19, 2011

Making Yourself More Attractive To Women

Making yourself more attractive to women basically comes down to avoiding obvious mistakes, for the most part. Yes there's the looks factor which can help significantly, but aside from this there are things within your power to change. For example, if you're fat, lose weight and get in shape. If your teeth are crooked, get them fixed. If you wear glasses, get fashionable ones. If you're balding, shave your head. If you smell bad, shower. If you have crappy clothes, get some new and more fashionable ones, but don't overdo this one since clothes that are too fancy can attract gold diggers who only go after guys with money.

Another thing you can do is improve your conversation skills if they are lacking, but they only need to be good enough so that you can hold a good conversation with a stranger, while at the same time being yourself. Also, if you are in a social environment, like a bar/club, you can boost your attractiveness a bit by socializing a lot with people there, thereby creating "buzz" around yourself. This can lure some women to you, but only if they themselves are willing to do their part in getting to know you. Otherwise nothing will happen. In fact, a good test for how attractive you are is to be in an environment where the women are approachable, friendly, and receptive to meeting men, because if they aren't then you may as well be 5 foot and weigh 300 lb for all the good it will do you.

So given that this is largely common sense, why do PUA methods go way beyond this in terms of what a guy needs to do to make himself more attractive? PUA based techniques are extreme because they take the woman's role out of the equation, thereby putting the onus all on the man to succeed. This comforts many guys because it gives them a feeling of always being able to control the outcome — "just do xyz differently next time and you'll succeed". It's an emotional security blanket for guys who want to stay as far away as possible from their former "AFC" days where they felt helpless to get with women. So they overcompensate by taking the extreme position that success with women is ALL within their control. With them having this state of mind they become vulnerable to PUA scams promising them all kinds of success with women if they just learn the proper methods. This is very similar to how people get sucked into self-help scams promising them the world on a platter if they just follow the right steps.

A common trap for guys who have trouble attracting women no matter what they do, is that they start down the PUA path of doing way too much, such as fretting over flipping attraction switches, push/pull, micro-calibration, negging, qualifying, etc. And as a result they unavoidably fall into the trap of over-analysis where they examine things which don't matter (mental masturbation) and lose that sense of give-and-take where the woman has to do her part in the mating dance, because it doesn't matter how good a dancer you are, if she can't (or won't) dance herself then nothing happens, ever!

Many guys experience constant problems with North American (or western-inspired) women, which I discuss in detail in my other blog (http://tomenunite.blogspot.com). So trying to succeed with these women, given that failure is often so high, can lead to obsessive-neurotic behaviour by men who are convinced that if they just change the right things in their "dating algorithm", success will happen. For some, going back to the drawing board is such a continuous process when trying to get with these fucked up women, that it can drive them practically insane (at worst). At best, it creates cognitive "blind spots" where they unconsciously lose sight of all their failures, and focus only on their relatively much fewer successes or the times they got "so close". This is just like a gambling addiction type of rationalization where they think they are getting so close to a big payback, but at most they can only really rely on luck (i.e. the numbers game). The antidote to this delusional thinking is to carefully document all your results, successes and failures, and then look at it all objectively. I did that and it's a big reason I've reached the conclusions I have.

9 comments:

DJ Fuji said...

Pretty good stuff, man. Saw this post linked somewhere and came to take a look. I agree with a lot of the general self help stuff and making yourself more attractive.

My only disagreement is that most of your writing carries an anti-pua and arguably even anti-women sentiment and is subsequently tainted with confirmation bias. In other words, you only see what you want to see. For every example you give, I can give a counter example from the community.

And therein lies the problem -- The "seduction community" is so large and expansive at this point, it's like religion -- you can use it to prove any point you want to because there's a billion different opinions out there.

If you truly believe the community is all a bunch of scam artists who promote poor advice and try to take advantage of guys, then when you look at the community stuff, the only thing your mind will focus on and see... is the scam artists and poor advice and taking advantage of people. There's certainly enough of it out there.

But it doesn't mean that the ENTIRE group (or even most of the group) is bad. It's the fallacy of composition, meaning that just because part of a group does something, it doesn't mean that the whole group does (or is) that.

John said...

In those instances where my writing carries an anti-pua sentiment it's because over the years that is what I've come to conclude. No, not every bit of PUA information is scam, and I mention that in my PUA Scam post (see comments). And if there's some new age PUA advice out that is really good that I don't know about and which would positively affect my views then someone should point out here where that is.

Confirmation bias can go both ways, also with the pro-pua crowd. But I would argue that at one point, for years, I was of the mindset that PUA is the way to go and was biased towards believing that it worked the way it's purported. In short, I tried, but even though I was emotionally invested in it I eventually had to let it go. So you really can't say I carry an anti-pua bias since I went in pro-pua, but due to what I've seen and experienced am now anti-pua, which has been the case for several years now. And unlike my pro-pua days I'm not conflicted now, because I'm not constantly struggling to maintain contradictions in my head. Truth has much more staying power than bullshit.

Most people who argue for PUA do so on philosophical grounds, where they harp on how good it is because "it makes sense" (on paper) or they say "I've heard of people who have great success with it", but that's almost always mental masturbation because their opinion is almost never rooted in personal long-term and first hand experience. Instead it's based on what they THINK should be true based on what they READ or what FEELS RIGHT, or in some cases they re-interpret what they experience through the mindset that PUA must work, which is what I used to do, but after a while it becomes obvious that something is wrong.

But PUA is also a symptom of a larger problem where women in this part of the world are concerned. And in this instance you get guys saying that women are the same everywhere, therefore success (or at least the same level of success) should be possible everywhere, and only depends on how much game you have. And this certainly makes sense thinking about it. But actual experience bears out something very different. And this gives rise to another group of guys who have traveled and say how much better women are in other parts of the world, based on what they actually experience, which is a much better argument than the guys who insist that women are the same everywhere because it just makes sense to think that way, not because they have actual experience to back it up. And that's a key point, distinguishing people who have a point of view based on the "it makes sense" approach and people who have a point of view based on the "I've seen it for myself" approach. Clearly, the latter is how you get closer to the truth. Imagine you have a bunch of people in a closed room arguing about the color of the sky. Some say it's orange and give reasons why it's orange, reasons which seem legit on paper. And then there's others that say that it's blue, because they've actually seen it. But the other guys insist that it's not blue because, on paper, it makes no sense because according to the theories they have in front of them the sky can't be blue, it must be orange instead. The problem is that only a small number of people are willing to investigate for themselves what the color actually is, and most prefer to stay indoors with the belief that the sky is orange because it's easier, and perhaps because they are emotionally invested in that belief.

DJ Fuji said...

Totally get what you're saying.

In my mind, bias is bias, and that means that oftentimes I have to think critically about pickup and be the devil's advocate in order to avoid the confirmation bias in the other direction.

I think what we're striving for here is truth and balance. And the truth is generally somewhere in the middle of the extremes. So at either extreme (pro or anti) you get a distorted view of the truth.

You started out pro and then turned to anti. In both situations, you're existing on the fringe/extreme sides and that means bias is going to prevent you from seeing the middle ground where the truth is.

There's PLENTY of pickup information out there for EVERY SINGLE walk of life. You can do NLP, you can do direct, you can do natural, you can do spiritual, etc. If you believe something, you will DEFINITELY find evidence for it out there, no matter how weird.

Of course you can say that you carry an anti-pua bias because you swung massively in the other direction after the pro-pua bias didn't work out for you. It would be like saying you were a republican and then bush got elected so you said "screw that the republicans suck" and became a democrat but you're still convinced that you aren't biased because you've tried both.

Bias doesn't mean you haven't tried both, it means that you lean toward one direction in spite of evidence to the contrary.

I'll be the first to tell you that there is a LOT wrong with pickup -- but that does NOT mean that all pickup is bad, or ineffective, or that the journey itself is not worthwhile. A few bad apples and a few bad teachers shouldn't dissuade you from a worthy cause.

And in terms of guys who have game and have traveled extensively (as I have), most of us (Mark Manson, RooshV, Nick Quick, etc) have the same conclusions -- that women are somewhat different but are really fundamentally the same. Sure they have different quirks, and some guys like women in different countries, but I think most of what you hear about how "great" it is in other countries is a reflection of the "grass is greener on the other side." Don't believe me? Go read what EVERY SINGLE LAIR says about their own city. It's ALWAYS harder in THEIR city than elsewhere. Even when the evidence overwhelming points to the contrary.

My philosophies and belief systems are based mostly on critical thinking -- that is, on logically sound conclusions based on empirical evidence. I try to avoid logical fallacies, bias, misleading stats, and faulty conclusions based on statistically irrelevant data. I'm always trying to question my beliefs in things and find counter evidence so that I'm always striving closer and closer to the ideal truth.

Something to think about, though not at all an attack on you or your writing:

A lot of what you write is influenced by specific things that "didn't work" for you and others and by mistakes other students have made along the way that prevented them from getting the results they wanted.

Is it then logical to conclude that based on this evidence, that the industry as a whole is a scam and universally doesn't work?

John said...

I agree that the truth is generally somewhere in between two extremes, but not necessarily exactly in between. In fact, sometimes the truth of the matter is close to one extreme rather than close to the middle. Back in my community days I spent quite a while thinking that there's a roughly even balance between good info and bad info but in my discovery I found that the bad info greatly outweighed the good. Hence my somewhat extreme position and my disagreement that the middle ground is where the truth lies where PUA is concerned. In my mind it's like saying Scientology or the book The Secret is a roughly even mix between good and bad, which it isn't. It's mostly bad.

Sure, women are basically the same everywhere when it comes to what generates attraction, but cultural differences have a big impact on what women will allow themselves to do and how they view male-female interactions. This goes much beyond just a "grass is greener" mindset. Of course, knowing this shouldn't stop guys from improving themselves, but rather recognize that success with women is a function of how attractive you are and what kind of women you are dealing with, which in large part depends on their upbringing.

Also, my point of view is based on me having little stake, either emotional or business wise. Furthermore, all my info is available for free so aside from maintaining the consistency of my online identity, I have no monetary stake in one point of view or the other.

I never said everything in the PUA community is a scam, just the large majority of it.

Anonymous said...

As much as I respect DJ Fuji and what he wrote, lets be honest about one thing. He makes a living from pickup, so there will obviously be a "middle ground" for him vouching for what keeps him financially secure.

It would be dumb for anyone to be anti-PUA publicly while making a living from it. Hence the confirmation bias argument.

There is no good or bad cancer. It's a terrible disease. The same with pickup. It's foundation is off to begin with so no group is better than the other.

The author of this website clearly states his opinions, and it's clear that it's based on his experiences which might not be entirely relevant to others, but he shows critical thinking after having tried and gone through that path.

In other words he keeps it real based on what he went through.

That fact alone makes me trust the author of this website much more, as my experience was very similar.

"A few bad apples and a few bad teachers shouldn't dissuade you from a worthy cause."

Sorry, but chasing women is not a worthy cause in my book.

Anonymous said...

I can tell that the blog author is the anon poster too from the writing style.

John said...

Nope, sorry that is not me.

Anonymous said...

John,

I don't know but I was very successful with the so-called "American/Western" women. There are some non-bitchy cute women that do not give me that much trouble. But I admit most of them were not all that hot. I do have an accent and maybe that's the "hybro vigor" or whatever.

Women in my native Balkan country TO ME seem conservative, picky, shallow, lacking manners, redneck....

Do you see the pattern?

I thought the girls you thought were way easier and nicer were like the girls you thought sucked and vice versa.

Read the above again.

Bottom line: If women find you attractive/hot and you lay a lot of them they start seeming very nice. It's all subjective.

Hence, girls in my country find me unattractive (they are bitches enough to tell it to me in the face) AND in your case American girls do not find you attractive.

It's simple and it may hurt as it does but it's evolution.

Fucking PUA's will never tell you this because they will lose 99% of their sheep.

Anonymous said...

The grass is greener. It is always easier when someone is on vacation, in my experience.