Anti-Dump Still Sucks

[skip2mylou781]

yea buddy if ur car breaks down and u gotta pull over on the highway, i wanna see u hop into a bar and use a phone, or find a payphone....and wow LUCKY U u can use someone elses cell because they actually think ahead UNLIKE u.....do u simply rely on other people to be smart and carry cell's and for u urself not to? i mean if u own a cell, then u gotta be smart and take it with u wherever u go JUST IN ****ING CASE

 

[Desdinova]

i mean if u own a cell, then u gotta be smart and take it with u wherever u go JUST IN ****ING CASE

What's the fun in that?

- I keep a cell phone on me when I travel by car, which isn't very often. There's no point in me doing this when I live in the city.

- I know how to change a tire and do maintenance on my vehicle. I also keep tools and fluids in my vehicle at all times.

- If I have absolutely no choice but to fend for myself, that's fine too. It's something new to experience, I'll meet some interesting people, and I get to expand my survival skills. There's a positive to every negative.

If I were to stress myself out over the whole "what if" scenario, I would never leave my basement.

 

[skip2mylou781]

just take ur ****in cell with u, y be so ignorant/???

 

[SexPDX]

The article has been taken off the main page, but I found it in quick tips, here is the link.

http://www.sosuave.com/quick/tip294.htm

I really didn't mean for this whole cell-phone vs. paper issue to be such a big part of this discussion, the article was really about the message it sends that you are prepared to get her phone number.

 

[Desdinova]

Thanks, SexPDX....

Women only want a guy when other girls want him. They want a guy who is in demand. They are not jealous of other girls.

I'm trying to figure out what he's trying to say here. Jealousy motivates people. A woman WILL get jealous if a man isn't paying his full attention to her. She dwells on her emotions which works in favor for the man.

When a man gives all his attention to the woman, those intense feelings of jealousy aren't there. Her IL is lower because she's not getting an emotional rush from this man. "Why isn't that other guy who talks to all the women ignoring me?" Her IL is higher for the guy who doesn't bother with her.

Social proof creates jealousy. A pen and paper (or cell phone) is nothing to be jealous of. Antidump is trying to use the woman's imagination to create the social proof. Unfortunately, the woman's imagination won't necessarily produce the wanted results.

She will assume you are successful if you are prepared. If you weren't, you wouldn't be carrying your pencil.

This just doesn't work. People carry pens for a number of reasons. (Even though I'm in a LTR, I still keep a pen on me, but for reasons other than writing down phone numbers). The pen is nothing but a writing utensil.

I have a feeling Anti-dump may have read too much into this one. It's that, or his advice here is obsolete from advancement in the seduction community (and in some cases, technology).

 

[SamePendo]

I think Anti Dump's (machine) is to be used once you went through the initiation phase (basic reading, bootcamps, etc). I hope that's the reason it's on the bottom of the DJ Bible. Once you went through the initiation process and all, you should have got up your level of confidence, coolness, become an interesting man, a sexual man. This all is asuming you know your ''thang'', and are in the LTR plan.

About the pen and paper thing, I suppose it was just to make a point on not being afraid of showing interest, on being sexual.

 

[TesuqueRed]

...First is that his whole approach appears to be aimed entirely at finding the "most interested woman" you can possibly find. I believe guys should definitely want to find a woman who is interested in them but her interest in you is just part of it. What about YOUR interest in HER. Since Anti-Dump was mostly focused on finding a woman to marry this is really important. I definitely think that most of us have certain qualities we look for in a woman besides just how interested she is.

good post sexPD

i always read his posts as starting after you've qualified her by your interest in her. Instead of simply testing the ocean-wide number of women out there, you narrow it down to those that interest you and then the games begin (maybe not the best choice of words there, but you know what i mean). Who would ask out a woman they weren't interested in already?

...Second, because Anti-Dump's approach is all about finding this postulated "most interested woman" his methods for interacting with women seem to involve a lot of tests to see how interested she is in you. There is nothing wrong with testing a woman's interest but there is the issue of CREATING the supposed interest that is being tested of which Anti-Dump's approach seems destitute. He seems to believe that a woman's interest in you comes from seeing you for the first time and nothing else. Based on my experiences, I don't consider this an accurate description of the facts of life. Maybe if you are a boxer brief model it is closer to the truth but for the rest of us a woman's interest in us depends largely on our communication, and by improving our skills in that respect we are able to interest more women.

...

yeah, he did approach it from one angle, but one that wasn't heard before as i recall. it's now become part of our canon. again, i like the debate and the further extension of it all (good post, worth saying again..)

i think that angle remains relevant today

This is another example of how he focused on the wrong things. The quality of your interactions with women are where you want to focus your energy. That is where attraction is created and you learn about her, whether you are even interest in her and if you are, what you have to do to make it happen (whatever "it" is).

Can't argue there.

(excerpted)-PDX

 

[djbr]

Oh yeah, the pen and paper thing.

I have a sharpie mini on my keychain. Sharpies are great because you can write on a shot glass, coaster, shoe, hand, bathroom wall, chest, swizzle stick, whatever... much fun. Since the phone is in the car or at home, the sharpie has been a life saver. But, BAC, Des, and I are pretty old-fashioned I would say. There is just something about the written phone number that has a special "Tah-Dah!" like a trophy won that a cell phone number exchange can't duplicate.

Cell phones can't duplicate that special way girls write.

And of course, it gets more intimate than just saying "put yo numba in my phone". Everyone does that. In paper? Almost no one.

edit: the AD's tip is great! I think people are reading more into it than the guy intended to say. It's just that: be prepared to get numbers. I don't know in USA, but here in Brazil cell phones were not too common in 2000 to the point of substituting pencil/paper.

 

[SexPDX]

Who would ask out a woman they weren't interested in already?

Granted a guy is more likely than a woman to be HUGELY interested based on first sight of her, it takes some time to know if you are TRULY that interested in her. Certainly it takes some time to know if you are interested to the point of wanting to marry her (which was always where Anti-Dump was going). The time I spent sarging with David Shade really opened my eyes up to these issues because he is only interested in a very specific type of woman, so specific that he had systematic ways of screening for it very early on which were very effective. Not that I am anything like him myself, but opened my eyes up to what it takes to answer those questions and part of it was the realization that you had to be always aware of what it is you are looking for.

To me this is a very important part of it all that Anti-Dump doesn't even begin to get to. His advice was meant to be simple, a set of rules and procedures that any guy, even a newbie, could follow. While it would be nice to believe that such rules and such a procedure existed, it is much more complicated in reality.

 

[Sean O]

I think the key difference between what Anti-Dump did and what most other people do today is that Anti-Dump didn't want to spend a lot of time trying to bring a woman's interest level to the point where she would be receptive to dating (after the number close, that is). Personally, I completely agree with this concept.

1) Being a DJ isn't just about getting women, but also about improving your life so that you don't really care if you have a woman in your life or not. If you really want to spend that much time and effort on trying to create interest, you have too much desire to have a woman in your life. In other words, you should focus on self-improvement first, so that you'll have a higher "base" level of happiness in your life, and thus being single won't be that big of a deal to you.
2) If she isn't attracted enough to you at the time of the number close to go on a date with you later, it will be difficult to raise that attraction over the phone. Thus, it's not worth your time.

That's just my interpretation, though.

 

[Maximus_Decimus]

Good to see you back SexPDX.

First and foremost, I don't think Anti-Dump's material was necessarily bad. There are some things I disagree with him (ie. I advocate kino whereas he didn't), but overall, his material provided a decent starting framework for beginners new to the game. IMO, any beginner with a shred of intelligence that grasped Anti-Dump's material would eventually realize there is more to learn out there than what Anti-Dump provided and would eventually be able to filter out the good material from Anti-Dump versus his less useful material (ie. Anti-Dump's stance on kino).

Specifically, if my memory is correct, Anti-Dump's framework promoted self-respect (not taking sh*t from women), prizing oneself, confidence, getting the chick to chase you (he called it challenge), and playing the numbers game. That isn't such a bad framework to start from ... LOL, I'd take his framework over the sh*t you hear on Oprah any day.

The issue is when people take in his material literally. Few bothered to give any thought to his material - probably moreso because Anti-Dump wrote his material as a set of "rules" which means either you follow them or you don't. Anybody decent at the game will realize there are general good practices to follow but because the game is fluent, it's impossible to follow a set of rules to the dot and sometimes, it makes sense to put the "rule" aside and go with what works in that situation.

Second, because Anti-Dump's approach is all about finding this postulated "most interested woman" his methods for interacting with women seem to involve a lot of tests to see how interested she is in you. There is nothing wrong with testing a woman's interest but there is the issue of CREATING the supposed interest that is being tested of which Anti-Dump's approach seems destitute. He seems to believe that a woman's interest in you comes from seeing you for the first time and nothing else. Based on my experiences, I don't consider this an accurate description of the facts of life. Maybe if you are a boxer brief model it is closer to the truth but for the rest of us a woman's interest in us depends largely on our communication, and by improving our skills in that respect we are able to interest more women.

I had a very interesting conversation with a very insightful friend a few weeks ago. The conversation was about various factors in men that women find attractive. For instance, if a woman is into tennis, she may naturally be more attracted to a man that plays tennis (preferably better than her) versus a man that doesn't play tennis at all, all other things being equal. With men, some men just prefer chicks with big breasts. If you throw a decent looking chick with smaller breasts at a man who values big breasts, she may be starting at a disadvantage, all other things being equal.

Anyways, at the end of our conversation, we both agreed that among all the factors that influence a woman's attraction towards a man, there are three common factors, that for the average woman, tend to have a heavier influence on attraction as compared to other factors:
1) Wealth (including potential wealth)
2) Physical attractiveness (this includes physical looks, age, how you dress, etc)
3) Personality & Social attractiveness (including social skills, humor, social proof, neediness, how your speak, leader of the group, etc)

Among the three factors above, women may even weight the factors differently. For instance, wealth may be valued by one chick more than personality. For another chick, she may value physical attractiveness more than wealth (note that as a woman's age increases, wealth tends to have a heavier influence for the average woman than when she is younger ... possibly because women at an older age are looking for financial security). For another chick, she may value personality more than wealth. Of course, the best is to be strong in all 3 of the above categories ... that wouldn't hurt your chances at all.

Back to Anti-Dump. There is some truth to what Anti-Dump says. If a woman values wealth, by default, if all other things are equal, you are starting at a disadvantage if you work at McDonalds and your net worth is $10. That's not to say you can't bang her. Maybe your physical attractiveness to her is a 10 and your personality to her is also a 10 and based on that, she does find you attractive. But if your competition is another guy she rates as 9.5 on physical attractiveness and 9.5 in personality and a 10 in wealth, you might be on the losing end of the stick against him.

(I have started a new thread on attraction in the Mature Man forum: http://www.sosuave.net/forum/showthread.php?t=105778)

If your conversation skills suck and you don't create solid rapport and attraction she is not going to be suddenly attracted to you because you whip out a pencil and paper to get her phone number. On the other hand, if you have an awesome conversation with you that fascinates her and draws her deeply into you she isn't going to be totally appalled when you finally ask for her number and say, "gee, I don't have a pen, let me get one."

Absolutely agree.

This is another example of how he focused on the wrong things. The quality of your interactions with women are where you want to focus your energy. That is where attraction is created and you learn about her, whether you are even interest in her and if you are, what you have to do to make it happen (whatever "it" is).

Some of what Anti-Dump wrote doesn't pan out. IMO though, if you don't read his material "literally" and can filter out what is useful and what isn't, his material isn't as bad as it first appears.

Maximus_Decimus

 

[Maximus_Decimus]

...

 

[chickenlegs03]

On my drunken nights out I always wake up with strange numbers in my phone that I dont know who they are!

Dude, LMAO, that's happened to me sooo many times. I look through my phone like "who the f' is that?" hahaha good times.

to the OP...good points. what you're saying is very closely related to what Player_Supreme talks about: don't chase hoes. i agree.

btw, that sharpie idea is great! except if she flakes then the number is not so easy to rub off...lol. but still a good idea, thanks.

 

[SELF-MASTERY]

I some times use my PDA to store numbers instead of my cell phone, because I think it's quicker.

 

[Tom Juan]

I don't post much anymore and even spend very little time lurking. However, showing up and seeing an Anti-Dump post on the main page of the site is frustrating nonetheless. I realize that you guys who post on the forum don't decide what articles go on the main page of the site, Allen does. Also, I don't read what is posted here enough to know how much Anti-Dump's ideas influence this place anymore.

To reiterate my main disagreements with Anti-Dump there are two main ones. First is that his whole approach appears to be aimed entirely at finding the "most interested woman" you can possibly find. I believe guys should definitely want to find a woman who is interested in them but her interest in you is just part of it. What about YOUR interest in HER. Since Anti-Dump was mostly focused on finding a woman to marry this is really important. I definitely think that most of us have certain qualities we look for in a woman besides just how interested she is.

What we learn in this community (in my interpretation) has always been about making ourselves more interesting to women in general. Assuming we come to be successful at this, there will actually be MANY women who are interested in us. Due to this increased general female interest in us, we will be in a position to see which of these women WE are most interested in. In short, that the woman's interest in us, which is nonetheless important, should be some sort of prime directive seems silly.

Second, because Anti-Dump's approach is all about finding this postulated "most interested woman" his methods for interacting with women seem to involve a lot of tests to see how interested she is in you. There is nothing wrong with testing a woman's interest but there is the issue of CREATING the supposed interest that is being tested of which Anti-Dump's approach seems destitute. He seems to believe that a woman's interest in you comes from seeing you for the first time and nothing else. Based on my experiences, I don't consider this an accurate description of the facts of life. Maybe if you are a boxer brief model it is closer to the truth but for the rest of us a woman's interest in us depends largely on our communication, and by improving our skills in that respect we are able to interest more women.

Having said all that, the article which now sits on the front page of sosuave.com is as flawed as any of Anti-Dump's ideas, if not more so. The idea that a woman will be think you are "in demand" as Anti-Dump puts it because you carry a paper and pencil is off base. Just because you are prepared to get phone numbers says nothing in the world about whether or not you are getting laid. I have done A HELL of a lot of PU and the times in my life when I was getting the most phone numbers were not when I was getting laid the most, not by a longshot. If your conversation skills suck and you don't create solid rapport and attraction she is not going to be suddenly attracted to you because you whip out a pencil and paper to get her phone number. On the other hand, if you have an awesome conversation with you that fascinates her and draws her deeply into you she isn't going to be totally appalled when you finally ask for her number and say, "gee, I don't have a pen, let me get one."

Anti-Dump also says in this article that there are two kinds of women who will not like you for carrying a pencil and paper for numbers and one of them is one with emotional problems who "can't stand the thought of competing with others." First of all, the idea that she is going to believe she is competing for you based on your having a pencil and paper has no basis in reality, even in a woman's mind. Most women have seen many guys who carry such things and many of them aren't getting laid and women are able to tell that is the case. Second, most women have emotional problems, it is more a questions of which ones you can deal with and which ones you can't than it is finding a woman with none whatsoever. If you know which emotional problems you simply can't deal with there better ways of finding if she has THOSE problems. That topic is beyond the scope of this post but those tools exist. The notion that carrying writing utensils is some sort of screening mechanism for emotional health is laughable.

None of this is to say that carrying a pencil and paper to write down numbers is a bad idea. Only that Anti-Dump reads way too much into the message it sends to women and how they will react to it. At best, to say you should carry a pencil and paper is a nuts-and-bolts tip. It is convenient to do so, and it goes no deeper than that.

This is another example of how he focused on the wrong things. The quality of your interactions with women are where you want to focus your energy. That is where attraction is created and you learn about her, whether you are even interest in her and if you are, what you have to do to make it happen (whatever "it" is).

-PDX

OMG! Internet beef is fvckin stupid! Use this time that you're wasting arguing with someone you have a %.5 chance of ever meeting in real life to get laid! Damn! Get a damn life! Nobody cares, he probably doesn't either!

 

[Desdinova]

Use this time that you're wasting arguing with someone you have a %.5 chance of ever meeting in real life to get laid! Damn! Get a damn life!

You are a poor, uninformed soul. Do a search on PDXs posts. He's been here for years, and has helped many newbies like yourself get laid. He has a number of the "guru's" teachings under his belt, and is regularly out in the field.

It's funny looking back on the past. I remember when PDX was into speed seduction. He's evolved greatly over the years.

Now I'm dating myself and feeling like an old fart

 

[mrRuckus]

If you have a house phone and not a cell phone, you are brain dead.

Pay for long distance? Uh... long distance on the end of a cord? Pay for long distance that you cant walk outside with? Soon "paying for long distance" will be another antique idea like the "rotary phone".

Um a house line is like $15. The lowest cell plans are like $50. And why exactly am i calling people long distance? WHy am i calling people at all? What's with all the chit chat when i could be out doing something with people in person? I have a cell phone and it barely even works in my apartment.

oh i forgot that i'm supposed to compete with people about who has the most versions of pacman on their phone.

 

[Phyzzle]

Anti-Dump is basically Doc Love. They're great writers, but neither one talks about creating raw attraction in the 1st few minutes.

Plus, some of their ideas are a bit outdated (hey, they're older guys.)

AD says take a pen and paper

DL says ask for the Home Phone Number, that the cell # = low interest!

They both seem to have trouble with caller ID. DL even suggests calling from various payphones until you get her on the phone and set up a date.

~Phyzzle

 

[Phyzzle]

That being said . . .

AD and Doc Love are NOT trying to get you laid a lot

They are trying to reduce America's divorce rate to zero. Okay, that's a noble goal. They just want you to be in LTR's with a woman who did not "settle for" you. And they want you not to tank her interest level.

What they say is all basically right . . . but there's so much more to this shyt!

 

[everywomanshero]

Doc Love's advice is terrible. I didn't listen to much of his radio address, because the first 5 minutes so filled with aweful advice. He may have some good ideas, I wouldn't know. Basically, this notion of leaving a woman wanting more is total BS to begin with, I can regularly lay girls within the first or second meeting with ease. There is no significant increase in flaking than when I've tried to wait longer to lay them, so I might as well get some poon out of the deal.

No one needs a pencil these days, you just put #s in cell. Every guy who wants women in his life needs a cell. When you're out how else will you know she wants a bootie call? ALso when going from girl's house to girl's house what are you gonna do... run to a pay phone? Hell no, you txt her so the girl you're with doesn't know. Geesh, even third graders know this stuff nowdays.

ADs posts haven't been read by me in a long time, but I remember thinking he had some pretty bad ideas in there.

NEXTING is another idea I've seen floating around. While there is power in demonstrating the willingness to walk away, when guys who aren't good with women try this NEXTING left and right, they just tend to end up alone which provides them even less opportunity to spend time with women and find out what works and what doesn't. I agree to NEXT when you've gotten too close to someone too fast and she's destroying your state, but outside that instance of her decreasing your power with other women, I think newbies need to look at this as a learning experience rather than something so serious all the time which is a major problem for men anyway,