Why are there so many dudes in the PUA/Game community that don't have their sh*t together?

[pipeman84]

My brother who lived in London has a tonne of value-6 ft , successful author , multi millionaire etc. the best he managed to date was a single mother off tinder - hoeflation is real - the biggest issue for him was he saw pua as creepy and never really made active effort to approach women consistently as he saw puas as creeps

The bolded part doesn't add up. Why would a guy as described even swipe on a single mom, let alone date her?

I think the common misconceptions men have over what consistent approaching can do for them is understated and I don't think the red pill helps - looking back I don't think more "value" or smv would've helped my brother but pua approaching and consistency would've done him a world of good.

Why would a multi millionaire in his right fvcking mind go to malls to cold approach women and make an ass of himself in the process when he could book a hotel room and have guaranteed sex with an escort? It's not like through 'day game' one gets a higher quality woman anyway ... it's just more time consuming and one has no control over the outcome.

 

[SW15]

average women are not looking to date average men

Rollo Tomassi is well known for saying this.

guy who works a White Collar job and does game.

A lot of white collar guys aren't doing in-person game anymore. A lot of white collar guys have shifted most of their game to the swipe apps and social media DMs.

Not my experience that pua's didn't have their life in order.. the people i know that had balls to approach also were go-getters in life.

I have mixed feelings about this. In general, there's not as much in-person approaching happening. Over the last 15 years or so, there's been a gradual shift (as mentioned above) to tech based dating methods.

I could imagine a guy with a lot of free time and a sexual need going out and pounding the pavement looking sex.

I don't think the younger guy who is a go-getter (especially in white collar) taking the time to do 3 hour mall approach sessions on weekends. I don't sense that the typical 30-40 year old unattached lawyer is going to want to make the effort to get up on a weekend and go to a mall/street/park/path and approach for 2-3 hours when he could stay at home in a t-shirt and underpants and swipe or message on Instagram.

I actually hang out with PUAs who fit the mold of not having their stuff together but still getting laid. Once we peel back the layers though, the story becomes a lot less impressive. I am talking banging fat girls, ugly girls, and gutter trash you see on Fresh & Fit.

I haven't been impressed lately with the looks of the females on the Fresh & Fit After Hours with Girls live streams. Most have been unimpressive looking though most panels will have one cute to hot woman.

I think it is worth pulling back the layers.

this young pretty McDonalds worker is going to shut down every guy within her age for a 34-year-old engineer making six figures not for his money at all?

This is not a pairing that I see often in the real world. There are few young, pretty McDonald's workers. In general, a female working at McDonald's would tend to associate more with blue collar men and men working McJobs too.

Engineers tend to live near other white collar professionals and go to the bougie nightlife venues. Their social circles tend to be other white collar professionals.

The only place that these two people might cross paths is at McDonald's and I doubt an engineer has enough social skills to hit on an employee woman at McDonald's and successfully impress her enough to plan future interaction.

Additionally, the logistics at a fast food restaurant (either drive thru or inside) aren't really conducive to this interaction actually happening or being successful.

Service volunteering can be a path...

I had once looked into that. Yeegads, every chick was fat, and I was looked upon as "fresh meat". This was one of the first times that I had an inkling about what a clown world we are in.

It's very common advice given to single men to volunteer to meet women. I think this advice mainly comes from people with a blue pill ideology and it is given to men in the middle of the bell curve. An 85th-90th percentile man + (aka Chad Thundercocck) doesn't need to consider volunteering and is generally not told to volunteer. In general, I think more men would be better off focusing on diet and fitness rather than volunteering as actions that are more beneficial to meeting women and finding meaningful dating opportunities.

If a man is passionate about some cause and wants to volunteer for something, then it might be something worth doing. It might not be fruitful for finding women under that set of circumstances.

My sense is that very few longer term relationships form from volunteering. Its results in putting together LTRs likely does not justify its hype.

I also wonder if single women are given the advice to volunteer at the same rates that single men are given the advice to volunteer. I doubt it.

 

[SW15]

I remember years ago I was talking to a woman on a dating app who just turned 30 (forgot which one may have been POF I don't even remember her name cause we never met) but she brought up something interesting. She mentioned that when she would go out with her girlfriends they would get hit on by guys all the time and she never would. However, in online dating, she had 100's of guys hitting her up. I didn't wanna state the obvious but I think she was realizing that she was the weakest link etc, and that she wasn't really all that even though her girlfriends were.

Online dating/Social Media gives women the illusion of choice but if it doesn't match up with your real world experiences or the only choices you have online is guys who wanna smash and not wife you up.

A lot of women don't realize this or by the time they do, they are to jaded or bitter to course correct

I have known women in real life that have had the same thing happen to them.

I have a female acquaintance who has a similar life story. She's now in her late 30s but what I am about to describe has been happening throughout her 30s. She's mediocre looking and I think most men would probably rate her somewhere between a 4.5-5.9.

In real life, she does not get approached much. Some of this is because her day-to-day routine is subpar for meeting people (a common problem for both single men and single women). She does not go to bars frequently enough and her non-bar routines are essentially useless. She has fielded approaches at parks and grocery stores every so often but nothing major has happened in any of times when she's been approached in non-bar settings.

She has had profiles on dating websites and swipe apps over the years and she's always had hundreds of men interested in her from the tech-based methods.

I think the patterns from her real life approaches are more indicative of her SMV than anything else. From swipe apps, she has mainly gotten shorter term sex from both Chads and mid tier men. This forum would consider her to be a penis carousel rider. Like you say, she has gotten jaded and bitter from the carousel riding on swipe apps. She's gotten nowhere near marriage from using swipe apps.

I think your comments on the illusion of choice and the disparity between online results and real life results were very insightful.

I think there are plenty more women other than the 2 we are mentioning here who are having these experiences that we are describing.

In your 20s most women don't care about your career like that because everyone is young and trying to grind or figure it out unless you're dealing with a particular kind of woman i.e. worried about status, golddigger, etc

However, in your 30s that's when it changes, in another thread Jesse Pinkman was talking about PUA guys in their 30s working low-entry jobs and staying with their parents. Game will maybe allow you to go on dates, and bang a chick for a couple of months. However the older you get the more your career and living situation matters. This is where I would say if you 35+ living at home or living in the trailer parks or a bad area it can affect your prospects and options. Most women will judge you on your place even if you have your own place, if her place is nicer than yours or not up to par you can lose women that way as well speaking from personal experience. IMO this where money can be a game-changer in regards to logistics. Women won't know if you're making an average income, rich, or broke, but they can gauge an idea by where you live, the type of car you drive etc.

I have said on this forum before that it it the combination of looks, money, status, and personality that attracts and retains women.

I agree that men in their 20s can rely mostly on looks to get laid. Many of us reading this thread have seen it happen.

I also agree that a change over happens somewhere in men's 30s with money becoming a more important factor in seduction. Most men will experience it somewhere between ages 30-35. In March 2011, Roosh was a 31 year old former microbiologist turned sex/dating content creator when he wrote the article below. For Roosh, this change over happened later but there are men who can experience it as early as 30.

Getting Laid While Unemployed And Living In Your Dad’s Basement

For men in their 30s and beyond, money becomes more important in seducing women who are substantially younger and the women closer to their own age.

At 35+, a man will need an above average apartment at a minimum to get laid in a bigger city if he tends to deal with bougie, college educated women. Being some sort of homeowner also tends to help, especially if the home is a nicer home. Owning a mediocre to subpar home probably won't help too much in attracting women. Prior to 30-35, a man can get away with having an older, more mediocre apartment and still seduce women.

Other possessions will be judged as well, but the home is the biggest possession that will be judged.

 

[Manure Spherian]

few longer term relationships form from volunteering. Its results in putting together LTRs likely does not justify its hype.

Here’s how so-called LTR’s form. Neurotypical, well-adjusted, socially-savvy guy gets up in the morning, lives his life, meets people and makes friends. He stumbles upon women at at school, places of recreation, work, and through friends, maybe even dating apps. He asks a woman out. They hit it off.

End of story.

This morning at 6:15 AM, still dark out, a pretty woman walked towards me across the street. I didn’t make eye contact or say hello, as I’m usually inclined to do to neighbors because I don’t feel like freaking out women walking alone in the dark. She said, “Hey, do you go to — Fitness?” I walked across the street and had a conversation. I was not interested in anything but conversation because I’m taken and she saw my wedding band. But this is how stuff starts, indicators of interest that just pop up and then lead to something else.

No analysis, no thinking of one’s height or money, no calculating.

If one doesn’t get IOI’s in daily life, something is off, which could be one’s own doing or just bad circumstances (eg, STEMmaxxing with other dudes 80 hours a week).

 

[Solomon]

At 35+, a man will need an above average apartment at a minimum to get laid in a bigger city if he tends to deal with bougie, college educated women. Being some sort of homeowner also tends to help, especially if the home is a nicer home. Owning a mediocre to subpar home probably won't help too much in attracting women. Prior to 30-35, a man can get away with having an older, more mediocre apartment and still seduce women.

Other possessions will be judged as well, but the home is the biggest possession that will be judged.

I think you're spot on but there is a flipside to what you're saying. Those things won't matter if you're dealing with a down-to-earth chick who really digs you. If you're trying to date a bougie chick, higher educated chick, or IG model type then yeah those things will matter a lot more. The reality is if you're finances aren't on point, it will affect your ability to retain certain women i.e. smokeshows, women who have things going for themselves, women who make more income than you etc.

This is why if you want hot women it's even more imperative that you have your **** together(not just money wise but all the other stuff we always talk about game, dress style, body etc) for most men they won't be able to retain a woman for long if you're dealing with hypergamous women, it's nothing new it's just the way **** is and always has been.

 

[Isildur1]

The bolded part doesn't add up. Why would a guy as described even swipe on a single mom, let alone date her?

Why would a multi millionaire in his right fvcking mind go to malls to cold approach women and make an ass of himself in the process when he could book a hotel room and have guaranteed sex with an escort? It's not like through 'day game' one gets a higher quality woman anyway ... it's just more time consuming and one has no control over the outcome.

Because it’s a good way to meet and make genuine connection with women? I used daygame and cold approach and it got me laid with “high quality ‘ women

Prostitutes are rife with disease why would anyone want sex with one? It’s a massive difference between a prostitute and cold approach lay one requires social coheision ,vibe and smv the other just basically money

 

[Solomon]

Over the past few years, I have met a number of guys that do PUA cold approach and follow a lot of PUA content out there themselves. In getting to know a number of these guys, I notice an overarching trend with about 80% of them. The vast majority of these dudes do not have their lives together, especially in a financial and career sort of way.

Like I am talking about dudes over the age of 30 that are unemployed, live with their parents, barely make any money, and do not really have much of a career path. The amount of dudes working odd jobs like busboy at a restaurant or at some fast food place yet going on PUA forums to find when they can go out to sarge. It is like I don't exactly get it. Even when I have gamed while unemployed, it was after having at least a good bit of runway as well as making supplemental income (don't you dare make a joke here @BillyPilgrim lol).

It is like once in a blue moon I might meet a guy who works a White Collar job and does game. Most of the time, this is the story.

1. Dude lives with parents way out in the suburbs

2. Drives out to the city on weekends to do daygame and nightgame sessions

3. Hopes he can sneak girls into his car

Its like are so many PUA coaches having this whole gimmick where they tell guys "I can help you get models while you are broke". It is what eventually turned me off to John Anthony Lifestyle.

Ok SO I've been watching Love is Blind whilst working, I know it's a show but there is a lot of stuff that's relevant to this thread. There is a guy named Nick, 28 years old, lives in his parents basement, a former football player (kicker) who works as a realtor, The girl he is engaged too her name is Hannah 26 years old, she works a higher paying job then him

NIck's parents pay all his bills except for his car insurance and food. Nick has no clue about finances and 401K etc. Why am I bringing this up? because as a guy who has had a 401K since 21 it's cringe to watch someone so clueless about(basic) finances etc. The guy has only his looks and he isn't handy around the house either.

Now you gotta wonder if women are hypergamous what benefit is she getting from dealing with Nick? I don't see them getting married. IMO Nick shouldn't be on the show and

1. Find a girl that's cool with his situation
2. Level up his life then date after
3. Do both 1 and 2

Personally I think you should he should do 2, women will always be there but man if you're close to 30 years old and don't even know wtf a 401K is in 2024 dating and women is the last thing you need to be worried about!

 

[Isildur1]

I have known women in real life that have had the same thing happen to them.

I have a female acquaintance who has a similar life story. She's now in her late 30s but what I am about to describe has been happening throughout her 30s. She's mediocre looking and I think most men would probably rate her somewhere between a 4.5-5.9.

In real life, she does not get approached much. Some of this is because her day-to-day routine is subpar for meeting people (a common problem for both single men and single women). She does not go to bars frequently enough and her non-bar routines are essentially useless. She has fielded approaches at parks and grocery stores every so often but nothing major has happened in any of times when she's been approached in non-bar settings.

She has had profiles on dating websites and swipe apps over the years and she's always had hundreds of men interested in her from the tech-based methods.

I think the patterns from her real life approaches are more indicative of her SMV than anything else. From swipe apps, she has mainly gotten shorter term sex from both Chads and mid tier men. This forum would consider her to be a penis carousel rider. Like you say, she has gotten jaded and bitter from the carousel riding on swipe apps. She's gotten nowhere near marriage from using swipe apps.

I think your comments on the illusion of choice and the disparity between online results and real life results were very insightful.

I think there are plenty more women other than the 2 we are mentioning here who are having these experiences that we are describing.



I have said on this forum before that it it the combination of looks, money, status, and personality that attracts and retains women.

I agree that men in their 20s can rely mostly on looks to get laid. Many of us reading this thread have seen it happen.

I also agree that a change over happens somewhere in men's 30s with money becoming a more important factor in seduction. Most men will experience it somewhere between ages 30-35. In March 2011, Roosh was a 31 year old former microbiologist turned sex/dating content creator when he wrote the article below. For Roosh, this change over happened later but there are men who can experience it as early as 30.

Getting Laid While Unemployed And Living In Your Dad’s Basement

For men in their 30s and beyond, money becomes more important in seducing women who are substantially younger and the women closer to their own age.

At 35+, a man will need an above average apartment at a minimum to get laid in a bigger city if he tends to deal with bougie, college educated women. Being some sort of homeowner also tends to help, especially if the home is a nicer home. Owning a mediocre to subpar home probably won't help too much in attracting women. Prior to 30-35, a man can get away with having an older, more mediocre apartment and still seduce women.

Other possessions will be judged as well, but the home is the biggest possession that will be judged.

Great worded post

Still on reflection of being in London and surrounded by middle/upper classes I still think increasing options is tough for the vast majority of men if they live in a competitive city . Looking at the view of London a city which is full of roughly 200,000 millionaires being a millionaire too doesn’t really count for much on the surface you still need something else to add to that

I was fortunate enough to inherit a house in London and a couple of apartments in San Fransisco when my father passed in my early twenties - this advantage didn’t make any difference whatsoever at university though most girls didn’t care bar one one night stand who said she was impressed with the size of my house

in terms of my social circle in London no girl seemed to give a rats ass either maybe because they were raised in middle upper class environments and never had a point when money was an issue

again consistent Cold approaching was easily the definitive factor for me meeting better quality women and having experience in my life to draw from even if the dates or the sets when **** I still learnt a lot from them too. I still think the majority of men just don’t approach enough to understand

 

[GoodMan32]

You're probably getting eliminated on other things besides height. Being under 6'0" doesn't help your cause either.

It's totally true that (as a rule of thumb) being tall helps your chances of getting a woman.

If you're incredibly socially awkward though, would being tall even help? For example, I had an incredibly socially awkward high school classmate who was probably 6'5" (yet no girls wanted him). He was one of only 2 guys in my grade who were stranger than me.

From what I've seen, it appears there's a certain social awkwardness threshold where once you cross it, height becomes irrelevant (as you automatically get eliminated based on social awkwardness alone)

 

[SW15]

Here’s how so-called LTR’s form. Neurotypical, well-adjusted, socially-savvy guy gets up in the morning, lives his life, meets people and makes friends. He stumbles upon women at at school, places of recreation, work, and through friends, maybe even dating apps. He asks a woman out. They hit it off.

This is true at a high level. However, it is worth examining some of the details.

Some problems may emerge in the "living his life" part of it. As a result, that will make finding longer term relationships more difficult. A lot of unattached men do not have a day-to-day routine that is going to make finding a longer term girlfriend or even shorter term sex easy. Too many men are spending time either doing their job, spending time in their home, and maybe going to a gym where most women aren't approachable due to headphones/earbuds.

Men with subpar day-to-day routines often end up as app swipers, which is inefficient if you don't look like Chad Thundercocck (aka 85th-90th percentile + in looks).

Approaching strangers is often a difficult path too. It can be inefficient as well and it's also time consuming to leave home, look presentable, select a venue, seek IOIs/approach targets, and start conversations. A good portion of initial interactions will be conversational dead ends.

In general, social circle interactions are better options in the shorter to medium to for finding a girlfriend. This is most applicable for middle of the bell curve men. If you're looking for an extended relationship (1-5 years or more), your best bet for getting that with the least amount of grief and frustration is through a social circle. You won't have to do as many approaches in either non-bar venues or nightlife venues or take as many rejections. You won't have a miserable time on swipe apps.

Places of recreation can be good options and some hobbies might be beneficial as well (a part of places of recreation). Digging deeper leads to more debate on it. Some recreation options are better than others.

If one doesn’t get IOI’s in daily life, something is off, which could be one’s own doing or just bad circumstances (eg, STEMmaxxing with other dudes 80 hours a week).

My thoughts on IOIs have evolved over time.

Generally speaking, you're correct that something is off and the individual man may/may not be responsible for a lack of IOIs.

Many men started to notice that IOIs were decreasing for them around the late 2000s/early 2010s (around the same time that the smartphone become popular). Around then, it started to become clear that Millennials (the young adult generation of that time) were not as socially savvy as previous generation and that women were getting immersed in their technologies. The Millennial generation had their formative years as a lot of new technologies were emerging. Now in 2024, we have 2 generations (Gen Y/Millennials and Gen Z) that have been raised in more digital worlds and have been less socially savvy. These less socially savvy Millennial and Gen Z are not as good at signaling interest to men.

Courtney Ryan had a video lately where she reacted to a Gen Z TikToker who had a difficult time signaling interest to a man in a coffee shop. The Gen Z TikToker is as attractive woman and she thought she was giving IOIs to a man. She removed her earbuds and tried to make solid eye contact with a guy. I consider this an example of how the younger generations are struggling with IOIs.

It is easier to approach with IOIs in place. It makes it more likely that the approach will be successful. However, with Millennial and Gen Z women being weaker at signaling interest, more and more men will find that they'll need to do approaches without IOIs.

At 35+, a man will need an above average apartment at a minimum to get laid in a bigger city if he tends to deal with bougie, college educated women. Being some sort of homeowner also tends to help, especially if the home is a nicer home. Owning a mediocre to subpar home probably won't help too much in attracting women. Prior to 30-35, a man can get away with having an older, more mediocre apartment and still seduce women.

Other possessions will be judged as well, but the home is the biggest possession that will be judged.

I think you're spot on but there is a flipside to what you're saying. Those things won't matter if you're dealing with a down-to-earth chick who really digs you. If you're trying to date a bougie chick, higher educated chick, or IG model type then yeah those things will matter a lot more. The reality is if you're finances aren't on point, it will affect your ability to retain certain women i.e. smokeshows, women who have things going for themselves, women who make more income than you etc.

I am a college educated White male who has primary been dealing with college educated White females since I graduated college.

A good portion of college educated women are bougie women. Not all, but there's a lot of overlap there.

Women with bachelor's degrees or higher (especially White women) do tend to have higher expectations in men.

IG model/influencer types also have higher expectations.

Both of those female groups tend to be heavily pursued. A lot of women with bachelor's degrees or higher tend to use swipe apps. Bumble seems to market to the educated white collar professional type female.

Down-to-earth women who are more genuine and higher interest level also have some baseline standards that they expect from men. Part of why they might "really dig you" is your money/possessions (at a base level) in combination with looks and personality.

You mention women who make more income than a man. Any woman who is higher income than a specific man will tend to be more difficult in longer term relationships, but could be a shorter term option for certain men. Higher income females often have numerous personality/attitude issues that aren't good in longer term relationships and might even be difficult in the short term.

This is why if you want hot women it's even more imperative that you have your **** together(not just money wise but all the other stuff we always talk about game, dress style, body etc) for most men they won't be able to retain a woman for long if you're dealing with hypergamous women, it's nothing new it's just the way **** is and always has been.

Having your stuff together is going to help with some of the most attractive women. These are women with abundance of options in life. I agree with everything you said in this quote.

 

[GoodMan32]

I have known women in real life that have had the same thing happen to them.

I have a female acquaintance who has a similar life story. She's now in her late 30s but what I am about to describe has been happening throughout her 30s. She's mediocre looking and I think most men would probably rate her somewhere between a 4.5-5.9.

In real life, she does not get approached much. Some of this is because her day-to-day routine is subpar for meeting people (a common problem for both single men and single women). She does not go to bars frequently enough and her non-bar routines are essentially useless. She has fielded approaches at parks and grocery stores every so often but nothing major has happened in any of times when she's been approached in non-bar settings.

She has had profiles on dating websites and swipe apps over the years and she's always had hundreds of men interested in her from the tech-based methods.

I think the patterns from her real life approaches are more indicative of her SMV than anything else. From swipe apps, she has mainly gotten shorter term sex from both Chads and mid tier men. This forum would consider her to be a penis carousel rider. Like you say, she has gotten jaded and bitter from the carousel riding on swipe apps. She's gotten nowhere near marriage from using swipe apps.

I think your comments on the illusion of choice and the disparity between online results and real life results were very insightful.

I think there are plenty more women other than the 2 we are mentioning here who are having these experiences that we are describing.



I have said on this forum before that it it the combination of looks, money, status, and personality that attracts and retains women.

I agree that men in their 20s can rely mostly on looks to get laid. Many of us reading this thread have seen it happen.

I also agree that a change over happens somewhere in men's 30s with money becoming a more important factor in seduction. Most men will experience it somewhere between ages 30-35. In March 2011, Roosh was a 31 year old former microbiologist turned sex/dating content creator when he wrote the article below. For Roosh, this change over happened later but there are men who can experience it as early as 30.

Getting Laid While Unemployed And Living In Your Dad’s Basement

For men in their 30s and beyond, money becomes more important in seducing women who are substantially younger and the women closer to their own age.

At 35+, a man will need an above average apartment at a minimum to get laid in a bigger city if he tends to deal with bougie, college educated women. Being some sort of homeowner also tends to help, especially if the home is a nicer home. Owning a mediocre to subpar home probably won't help too much in attracting women. Prior to 30-35, a man can get away with having an older, more mediocre apartment and still seduce women.

Other possessions will be judged as well, but the home is the biggest possession that will be judged.

It's been said on this forum that a woman will no longer settle for an average man because gone are the days when a woman absolutely needed a man for survival.

Your post (about how the woman you know has only gotten casual sex on apps; nothing close to marriage) illustrates the flipside: Just like a woman doesn't absolutely need a man for marriage anymore, a man doesn't absolutely need a woman for marriage anymore (as most Millennial men know how to do stuff around the house...laundry, operating the dishwasher, etc).

Men who were born in the 1930s/40s, on the other hand, had no choice but to get married, as they didn't know how to do the so-called woman's work around the house.

So, for a Millennial man who can hold his own with housework, what incentive does he have to settle for that average-looking woman you know (other than for short-term casual sex)?

 

[GoodMan32]

Here’s how so-called LTR’s form. Neurotypical, well-adjusted, socially-savvy guy gets up in the morning, lives his life, meets people and makes friends. He stumbles upon women at at school, places of recreation, work, and through friends, maybe even dating apps. He asks a woman out. They hit it off.

End of story.

This morning at 6:15 AM, still dark out, a pretty woman walked towards me across the street. I didn’t make eye contact or say hello, as I’m usually inclined to do to neighbors because I don’t feel like freaking out women walking alone in the dark. She said, “Hey, do you go to — Fitness?” I walked across the street and had a conversation. I was not interested in anything but conversation because I’m taken and she saw my wedding band. But this is how stuff starts, indicators of interest that just pop up and then lead to something else.

No analysis, no thinking of one’s height or money, no calculating.

If one doesn’t get IOI’s in daily life, something is off, which could be one’s own doing or just bad circumstances (eg, STEMmaxxing with other dudes 80 hours a week).

I'm basically illiterate at telling the difference between friendliness and flirting. It's possible I get IOIs I'm unaware of.

Speaking of your wedding ring, I've heard that wearing a wedding ring can lead to men getting hit on more often (Because just like you're more attractive to employers when you already have a job, you're more attractive to a woman when you already have a woman). Is that true? If so, perhaps I should find myself a fake wedding ring.

 

[Manure Spherian]

I'm basically illiterate at telling the difference between friendliness and flirting. It's possible I get IOIs I'm unaware of.

You are illiterate in this area yet you have said that you will not ask a woman out to see whether it’s friendliness or flirting. This leaves you with nothing.

Is that true?

Women like men with women. They even like promiscuous men.

Wearing a wedding ring while being unwed is a terrible idea.

 

[pipeman84]

Because it’s a good way to meet and make genuine connection with women? I used daygame and cold approach and it got me laid with “high quality ‘ women

All the infields I've watched on YouTube are cringy AF (I recently addressed the weirdo who was literally running after women on an elevator). No high quality woman (meaning physically attractive and mentally sane) would respond to such approach.

Prostitutes are rife with disease why would anyone want sex with one? It’s a massive difference between a prostitute and cold approach lay one requires social coheision ,vibe and smv the other just basically money

There are all sorts of prostitutes. Many IG 'models' guys drool over are actually prostitutes. A woman who has sex outside of a serious relationship is a slvt ... arguably dumber than the escort, who monetises the sex. She gets the money while the bimbo being pumped & dumped by the PUA gets nothing.

 

[GoodMan32]

You are illiterate in this area yet you have said that you will not ask a woman out to see whether it’s friendliness or flirting. This leaves you with nothing.

Women like men with women. They even like promiscuous men.

Wearing a wedding ring while being unwed is a terrible idea.

I've humiliated myself enough times by mistaking niceness for interest, there's a reason I won't ask a woman out anymore to see whether it's friendliness or flirting.

If (as you pointed out) broads like men with broads, why would it be a terrible idea to wear a fake wedding ring?

 

[AmsterdamAssassin]

I've humiliated myself enough times

I think you should get over this fear of humiliation by getting humiliated a little more...

If (as you pointed out) broads like men with broads, why would it be a terrible idea to wear a fake wedding ring?

Because no woman is going to believe that you're married.

 

[SW15]

If you're incredibly socially awkward though, would being tall even help? For example, I had an incredibly socially awkward high school classmate who was probably 6'5" (yet no girls wanted him). He was one of only 2 guys in my grade who were stranger than me.

From what I've seen, it appears there's a certain social awkwardness threshold where once you cross it, height becomes irrelevant (as you automatically get eliminated based on social awkwardness alone)

Being tall will help but the combination that's best is tall and fit/muscular.

Social awkwardness will offset the combination of tall and fit/muscular at a certain point. You've observed that with your comment about the threshold. There is a threshold and no one knows where it is. It's subjective.

As always, seduction is a combination of looks, money, status, and personality. A 6'0"+ man who is tall/muscular doesn't need as much of a personality as a more average looking man. He still needs some personality attributes.

It's been said on this forum that a woman will no longer settle for an average man because gone are the days when a woman absolutely needed a man for survival.

Your post (about how the woman you know has only gotten casual sex on apps; nothing close to marriage) illustrates the flipside: Just like a woman doesn't absolutely need a man for marriage anymore, a man doesn't absolutely need a woman for marriage anymore (as most Millennial men know how to do stuff around the house...laundry, operating the dishwasher, etc).

Men who were born in the 1930s/40s, on the other hand, had no choice but to get married, as they didn't know how to do the so-called woman's work around the house.

So, for a Millennial man who can hold his own with housework, what incentive does he have to settle for that average-looking woman you know (other than for short-term casual sex)?

You have an interesting observation that Millennial men don't need women as much for marriage anymore as compared to Silent Generation/early Baby Boomer men born in the 1930s-1940s.

I think Millennial men who can manage household labor tasks will still pursue marriage. While cooking, cleaning, and other household labor tasks skills might be less required, there are still elements of marriage that will be appealing.

I think sex, emotional support, and a good situation for raising children will be what is more desired in a marriage by men. The first two (sex and emotional support) can be a part of a boyfriend-girlfriend relationship without marriage. Getting married for the purposes of family formation and raising children into adulthood will have a place in Western cultures in the near term.

The role of sex in marriage is changing. More people are having sex without being married. There are still religions that ban sex outside of marriage for its members. Those members will pursue marriage for the sake of sex. In less devoutly religious pairings, there will still be men who get married with sex as a motivating factor. There are blue pilled men who think that they will need to marry their girlfriend to keep her having sex with him. Scarcity mentality will take over and there will be a wedding and a marriage.

Men will either need a girlfriend or a wife for his emotional support needs. I mentioned yesterday in a thread that emotional support is part of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs in psychology. While a man can get some level of emotional support from his family and friends, that is often not sufficient for his needs. As a man ages, his parents will eventually get terminal illnesses and die. He will no longer be able to count on his parents for emotional support and the same would be true for any uncles/aunts of similar ages to his parents. Then, siblings and cousins are not likely to be available for emotional support either. In adulthood, men aren't able to count on siblings or cousins too much for emotional support. Most men's siblings or cousins are blue pilled men/women who will be busy with their own marriages, divorces, raising children, and then eventually dealing with grandchildren when the man is old enough. Like siblings and cousins, friends often become less available in adulthood for emotional support because friends are busy with their marriages, divorces, raising children, and eventually dealing with grandchildren. Eventually, a girlfriend or wife becomes valuable for emotional support and companionship. Scarcity mentality does take over here as well for many men in thinking they need to marry to keep up the emotional support aspects they receive from a romantic relationship.

Marriage provides some level of stability in a partnership and helps with the atmosphere for raising children. There are many men who desire to have children in a relationship. This is a motivator for men desiring marriage, even for men who are only mildly religious or not religious at all. It is best for the children if a mother and father stay together until the children reach adulthood.

Marriages still fail regularly. Marriages have a 50%+ failure rate if failure is measured by a divorce within 20 years of the wedding day.

There's about an 80% chance of AT LEAST one of the following 3 things happening over the lifespan of a marriage...

• Divorce
• Affair
• Long periods of a mediocre to subpar dynamic where the relationship just continues on based on inertia/societal pressure. The passion is gone.

Do any of those 3 things sound good to you? They don't to me.

I want to finish this response by discussing the late 30s woman that I know who was mentioned in the quote above. What are her chances for getting married now? What's her SMV like today? What might she have done differently in the past?

Many men won't marry her for sex alone, though she might be able to lure a similarly aged mediocre looking beta male into marriage with sex. She won't get marriage for sex alone from an alpha/sigma guy. Alpha/sigma guys would marry someone but they'd likely marry someone younger and better looking. Additionally, if they want to have children, they don't want children with a woman pushing 40. A lot of betas wouldn't want to have biological children or even adopt children with a woman close to her age.

She is unlikely to get the opportunity to marry for having biological children at this point. She is likely to have problems conceiving in her late 30s/early 40s. Adoption is probably more realistic for her based on her age. However, I think it would be challenging for her to find a man willing to marry her and wanting to adopt a child with her. There are a number of issues around that and I don't want to go into detail on that in this thread.

She is unlikely to find a male who wants to marry her based on what emotional support can she offer.

As an average looking woman in her late 30s, her SMV is not that high. She has options but she's not likely to like what options she has. There's a decent chance that she would be able to get a low to mid tier beta to commit to her but she's not likely to like what he has to offer her. The children issue would be a bigger issue. There's a chance that the beta who is willing to commit to her already has children from a previous relationship or marriage. That's not something easy to deal with for any woman.

She didn't receive a marriage proposal in any of her relationships prior to age 30. She was better positioned for marriage and having biological children when she was younger.

On the apps right now, she has plenty of options. She has what she would consider to be an illusion of abundance.

 

[Isildur1]

This is true at a high level. However, it is worth examining some of the details.

Some problems may emerge in the "living his life" part of it. As a result, that will make finding longer term relationships more difficult. A lot of unattached men do not have a day-to-day routine that is going to make finding a longer term girlfriend or even shorter term sex easy. Too many men are spending time either doing their job, spending time in their home, and maybe going to a gym where most women aren't approachable due to headphones/earbuds.

Men with subpar day-to-day routines often end up as app swipers, which is inefficient if you don't look like Chad Thundercocck (aka 85th-90th percentile + in looks).

Approaching strangers is often a difficult path too. It can be inefficient as well and it's also time consuming to leave home, look presentable, select a venue, seek IOIs/approach targets, and start conversations. A good portion of initial interactions will be conversational dead ends.

In general, social circle interactions are better options in the shorter to medium to for finding a girlfriend. This is most applicable for middle of the bell curve men. If you're looking for an extended relationship (1-5 years or more), your best bet for getting that with the least amount of grief and frustration is through a social circle. You won't have to do as many approaches in either non-bar venues or nightlife venues or take as many rejections. You won't have a miserable time on swipe apps.

Places of recreation can be good options and some hobbies might be beneficial as well (a part of places of recreation). Digging deeper leads to more debate on it. Some recreation options are better than others.



My thoughts on IOIs have evolved over time.

Generally speaking, you're correct that something is off and the individual man may/may not be responsible for a lack of IOIs.

Many men started to notice that IOIs were decreasing for them around the late 2000s/early 2010s (around the same time that the smartphone become popular). Around then, it started to become clear that Millennials (the young adult generation of that time) were not as socially savvy as previous generation and that women were getting immersed in their technologies. The Millennial generation had their formative years as a lot of new technologies were emerging. Now in 2024, we have 2 generations (Gen Y/Millennials and Gen Z) that have been raised in more digital worlds and have been less socially savvy. These less socially savvy Millennial and Gen Z are not as good at signaling interest to men.

Courtney Ryan had a video lately where she reacted to a Gen Z TikToker who had a difficult time signaling interest to a man in a coffee shop. The Gen Z TikToker is as attractive woman and she thought she was giving IOIs to a man. She removed her earbuds and tried to make solid eye contact with a guy. I consider this an example of how the younger generations are struggling with IOIs.

It is easier to approach with IOIs in place. It makes it more likely that the approach will be successful. However, with Millennial and Gen Z women being weaker at signaling interest, more and more men will find that they'll need to do approaches without IOIs.





I am a college educated White male who has primary been dealing with college educated White females since I graduated college.

A good portion of college educated women are bougie women. Not all, but there's a lot of overlap there.

Women with bachelor's degrees or higher (especially White women) do tend to have higher expectations in men.

IG model/influencer types also have higher expectations.

Both of those female groups tend to be heavily pursued. A lot of women with bachelor's degrees or higher tend to use swipe apps. Bumble seems to market to the educated white collar professional type female.

Down-to-earth women who are more genuine and higher interest level also have some baseline standards that they expect from men. Part of why they might "really dig you" is your money/possessions (at a base level) in combination with looks and personality.

You mention women who make more income than a man. Any woman who is higher income than a specific man will tend to be more difficult in longer term relationships, but could be a shorter term option for certain men. Higher income females often have numerous personality/attitude issues that aren't good in longer term relationships and might even be difficult in the short term.



Having your stuff together is going to help with some of the most attractive women. These are women with abundance of options in life. I agree with everything you said in this quote.

For me daygame transformed my life - yes it was time consuming but I learnt a great deal from it and when done right it can be incredibly awarding . I made a lot of connections and enjoyable experiences and all together felt more appreciated in these relationships it also grew my social confidence something that didn’t happen in my teen years - yes it takes time but alot of men waste their time doing other bogus stuff like watching sports , scrolling on instagram etc. if they spend 30 mins a day open 2-3 women over a year that’s 1000 women and you’re going to get some results eneveitably with half decent smv

I also saw a lot of wingmen being successful too although a quantity did fail who were more on the Asperger’s autistic spectrum and lacked the empathy to make decent social connections with women that they met- I saw that as the main sticking point that was really hard for 10-20 percent of men to fix - for the rest dealing with the mental burden of blow outs and bad dates was also tricky those who could withstand that generally got good results

 

[SW15]

daygame transformed my life

I read Roosh's "Day Bang" very soon after it was published in September 2011. I transitioned more of my practice from nightlife venues to non-bar. I was in my late 20s then and seeking a way out of the bars. I had been aware of daygame as early as my early 20s but never knew how to put daygame into practice in real life until "Day Bang".

In 2011-2012, I had zero experience with what it is considered pure daygame. At that point in life, I had been in the mating environment for over 10 years. Almost all of my experience at that point in life was night game (off campus apartment parties in college and bars after I turned 21). I had never done a grocery store approach. I had never done a mall or bookstore approach. In high school and college, I had approached some girls in my classes and on campus, but it was the minority of my lifetime approaches at that point in my life.

Over the past 12-13 years, I have been a primarily daygame guy when I have needed to meet new women. There have also been times in the past 12-13 years where I have used websites and apps, but those were always poor experiences. I still have done some night game since the early 2010s but more of my night game was done during the 2000s.

for the rest dealing with the mental burden of blow outs and bad dates was also tricky those who could withstand that generally got good results

The rejections and bad dates can be tough. I've dealt with both of those in approaching.

I have been disrespected, humiliated, and emotionally abused via approaching strangers. The treatment is unreal and inhumane. If I were a dog and I was treated as poorly as I have been in approaching, I would be in one of those ASPCA commercials.

A lot of men are going to be dealing with the mental burden of rejections and bad dates from approaching strangers. This is something that happens in both bar approaching and non-bar approaching. For some, the rejections and bad dates end up having a long term effect.

There are also men who get a mental burden from a lack of success in the app environment too.

 

[GoodMan32]

I think you should get over this fear of humiliation by getting humiliated a little more...


Because no woman is going to believe that you're married.

I've been asked if I'm married before. I've also been presumed to be married before.

Getting over a fear of humiliation by getting humiliated more; that's like saying someone who's afraid of dogs (because they've been bitten by dogs) could get over their fear of dogs by getting bit some more. In both cases, more exposure is only going to further solidify the phobia.