characternote
Master Don Juan
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2018
- Messages
- 943
- Reaction score
- 1,124
Lol, no you haven’t read that whole book. Nothing in it is what you just described. C’mon brother, stop being a KJ.But it doesn't matter. This isn't 2004. The community aren't still out there thinking of game as some sort of jedi mind control. Anton whoever would get rejected just as much as anyone else if he approaches a girl who isn't attracted to him
And you’ve read the 1,500 pages of God Like Power and it’s extra parts?yes, i've got god like power, too. I've seen it all
i think that you should go live in the real world broAnd you’ve read the 1,500 pages of God Like Power and it’s extra parts?
Tell us some things you learned and why you think Vadim and what he teachss is better than Mike Haines and what he teaches in that material.
What does that even mean?i think that you should go live in the real world bro
less books about sh1t and more field workWhat does that even mean?
This is a big cope by guys that are too lazy to read or watch anything.less books about sh1t and more field work
you can not learn about women from books , no matter how good the book is
women are relative human beings , which means that how they will behave will depend on a lot of factors which books will not cover . Books will always try to simplify something
quite sure that your are very high on the social intelligence tooThis is a big cope by guys that are too lazy to read or watch anything.
You would like to think I don’t actually approach because I’ve read all this material.
I approach girls every day, do you?
Learning about it and doing it aren’t mutually exclusive.
I’ve just made it easier for alot of guys here because I’ve seen and read almost everything.
Even giving those recommendations above - MOST guys won’t read them because they’re too lazy, have all the excuses and copes, just like you now.
You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make them drink it.
If you want simplification, then read his hero Mike Hains if you haven't already.Books will always try to simplify something
no one talks about timing , which is maybe one of the most important thingsIf you want simplification, then read his hero Mike Hains if you haven't already.
I don't think anyone here will learn anything that they didn't already know, that's for sure.
He strikes me as another armchair PUA. No infields of course! (a crime for any 'seduction coach' if you ask me! We can all make courses and write ebooks!)
Just the usual 'masculine' advice.
In summary:-
''You can get laid with incredibly attractive women by being boring and
predictable, but only if you understand that there's no reason you're not
enough'' (the usual 'inner game' stuff we've all read a million times. 'you are the prize!!' etc)
''time = attraction'' - stay in set long enough and she'll become attracted because you are male and she's female. Not really true, but even if it was, he seems to neglect the very real situation of girls literally telling you they're not interestsed and ejecting after you say hi etc lol -not giving you the opportunity to spend 2 hours in set, making his theory redundant in most cases.
''compliment, tease, compliment, tease'' - this is his conversational framework after you open. You compliment then tease then compliment, then tease etc. If you 'run out of something to say', compliment her.....then tease her. You get the idea. Hardly groundbreaking. And of course 'wrong' according to many other PUA experts
''you simply be yourself when you approach a girl. Be congruent, be innocent, and be
normal, and you stay in set (time = attraction) while joking around a little (push/
pull) and occasionally being physical, gradually she’ll stop feeling like she has to
put on a ***** persona around you. And then she’ll be more like herself ''
So, 'be yourself'. Again. Ground breaking. It's all stuff we all know lol. It's either incredibly simple advice we all know, or they go the other way and complicate the process beyond recognition (like NLP ross jefferies or something) and then you have a whole new set of problems of girls thinking you are autistic haha
The fact someone thinks that advice is so special tells me all I need to know about their level tbh
I have similar notes on that 'anton' dude and just about every other course and Ebook/author I have (basically any PUA in existence) since I like to be able to refer back to things.
We all know all there is to know about game. We've likely all read all the books and seen all the courses and tested the lines and theory. It all 'works' (when you are her type) and it all fails if you open a girl who is not at all interested.
I’m clearly far more experienced than anyone I’ve encountered here. There seems to be alot of keyboard jockeys here.I mean , you start arguments with experienced guys about some bullsh1t that you read , while also trying to look smart ( thus validating that you come from a lower value point than me or the other guys )
Do you actually know what attracts a woman to a man? You just wouldn’t say any of these things if you did.a woman can only deal with a couple of interesting guys at a time
Lmao - this is the same old hackey argument: if you know alot and have read alot = you must rarely approach. JUST LOL.The best dating coaches and PUAs get them, the worst ones (majority) do not. The worst ones try to fight for clout, throw theory at you, waste time with politics on a forum, and don't get results. The best ones are too busy pounding the pavement and approaching out there.
Knowing more does not equal getting results. Anyone can post spam and walls of text but then choke when they are in front of a girl.Lmao - this is the same old hackey argument: if you know alot and have read alot = you must rarely approach. JUST LOL.
It’s ok that there’s guys here are more experienced, know more and have read and learned more than you. It’s not a big deal. Learn from them.
You are wasting your time with this guyKnowing more does not equal getting results. Anyone can post spam and walls of text but then choke when they are in front of a girl.
I don't care to learn from guys who say a lot, I care to learn from guys that do a lot and actually get results.
That's true. I'm with you. Their success was the result of getting as good looking/fashionable etc as possible, and then hitting on a tonne of girls. Their 'game' model was non existent. Essentially say hi to girls and make it clear very fast that you are into them. If they are recepitive, escalate. If they're not, move on to the next. It works (assuming you can get too a certain attractive threshold). And i'm not hating on that. In reality, it's kind of all anyone is doing (even if they kid themselves that they have more power than they actually do because they studied NLP patterns or whatever).Good Looking Loser had awful game and I hated how aggressive he was. However, on his forums, the dudes clearly got laid because they had the receipts and field reports to prove it.
Perfect, then you can learn from my posts. If you’re using anything by Jmulv, you need the help.Knowing more does not equal getting results. Anyone can post spam and walls of text but then choke when they are in front of a girl.
I don't care to learn from guys who say a lot, I care to learn from guys that do a lot and actually get results.
Perfect, thanks brother. I appreciate the support.I think books are great. (I'm a book nerd.)
But it is extremely difficult to ingest volumes of material and somehow incorporate such new information in your behavior.
So, yeah, all else being equal, my money is on the guy with experience.
Totally agree. What work would you be doing though if you hadn’t gotten the results you want in the past?The people selling the courses will be like “oh it’s all about accountability, we’re here to make sure you actually take action” but you don’t need to pay to do that, you can get a friend to hold you accountable or you can hold yourself accountable. Ultimately when it comes down to it, you’re going have to hold yourself accountable to do the work – especially when the course is over and how driven you are starts to decrease over time.