Initial attraction: Beta Male Body Language

Post Reply New Topic

Two sides of the same coin; the difference is just a matter of perspective. Nothing easily obtained is valued. Air is worth nothing, until it becomes scarce.

When it's something that, additionally, becomes hard to get rid of ... then its worth less than nothing, it becomes a nuisance.

Last edited by edgewaters on 28 Jun 2012, 10:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

It is more about what benefits you. I will alter my appearance if it helps me get ahead in a corporate environment so I can get more money to spend on the things I like.

You adopt alpha body language so you can get the sex you want since sex is really the only reason men bother. Everything else is just window dressing.

i don't rank myself, and by extension i do not rank others either. i was with one man in a FWB situation, and he said he didn't understand why i chose to be with him as opposed to some other guy, because he perceived himself to be low status. i think his perception of status (and his placement on the totem pole, according to himself) actually inhibited his chances with women.

*cue people telling me i am different from other women because of _X_ reasons*

You're probably right.

It's that simple!

I wish it was the 50s, no need for body language, you could just punch people and not get legal charges pressed against you. How times have changed.

Thanks, I'm glad you didn't find it to be an exaggeration and even if it is a film, it still does highlight social mistakes well.

Definitely, the staring is a good point to touch on. The person in a party or a bar leering at the women from the corner and staring is going to look far more creepy and awkward than the person who is involved or socializing with everyone else in the party.

Staring also shows you are more hesitant because you are indicating that you want to talk to her but you aren't assertive enough to take the initiative to talk to her and as we know, men are expected to take the initiative in society.

I think a major step in approaching social interactions is to remain positive, if people approach situations negatively and start to become concious of the what ifs, they are more likely to feel negative and come off as less confident when it comes to approaching the opposite sex.

As people on the spectrum, we naturally aren't aware of these behaviours and how they can be negative in social situations. Making ourselves aware and improving our understanding to make a concious effort is helpful, even if some of you believe your success is predestined by a certain script.

I was watching a video which gives good examples of assertive, aggressive and passive behaviour in body language and tone of voice.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ymm86c6DAF4[/youtube]

I don't think you're different from other women, you are just as self-deluded as most women are. Your guy's valuation either of himself or you was off, he either ranked himself to low (overly self-critical or not adjusted for context) or ranked you too highly (putting a woman on a pedestal) both quite common and more likely than not it was a combination of the two.

If we use a classic 1 - 10 scale, our internal valuation method adjusts for opportunity. In effect, what's a 10 in let's say Detroit, may be a 6 in LA, or what's a 3 in Toronto, may be an 8 in Alaska. It's all relative to what you have access to.

no, i am not actually deluded (nor are most women). what a strange thing for you to say. i suppose if you cannot reasonably argue with someone, it is easier to simply call them delusional.

what you said about the guy somehow valuing me incorrectly makes no sense considering that you undermined your own point. fact is, there isn't any sort of universal ranking system - not even in a closed group. if you ask 2 people to rank a group of individuals, they will come up with different rankings. and a sociologist found that people's rankings changed when they got to know each other.

a person who chooses mates primarily according to the supposed rank on first sight is highly likely to fail miserably because that sort of shallow valuation doesn't take other people into account as human beings with other facets. in the case of the guy i was sexing, his belief that he was somehow beneath me meant that he lacked self-confidence around the same women who would actually be interested in him.

at first, he treated me with suspicion and distance when i approached him, because he thought i was having a laugh. not that women had done that to him before, but he thought so little of himself (stemming from ill treatment from his parents, for the most part) that he hamstrung his own chances.

so he aimed for women that he didn't really find that attractive because he thought he couldn't really have anyone else. but THOSE women sensed he was "settling" for them and they rejected him. it was a horrible cycle and i suspect he is still embroiled in it several years later.

Of course rankings change, hence why they are relative. Does "comparative evaluation of potential partners" sound more palatable to you? If you do not do some form of ranking in this manner, then you would have no way to distinguish between multiple options when it comes to a partner.



If a person isn't attractive at first sight, the odds of a person approaching them is very small, hence they do not add the additional "personality factor" into the equation at all. Most people are not likely to initiate a relationship with someone if they do not find them physically attractive at all. They may do so if they rank the person within their accepted deviation but not if they are not attracted to them at all.

In the case of your guy, he either valued himself to be beneath women of comparable values, or valued women of a comparable value at too high a level.

Let's say he was a 4, and you're a 4, he may value himself as a 2, and you as a 6.

i don't sort through people like items in a bargain bin when i am choosing who i want to date - there isn't any BEST option. there are human being who i may be more or less compatible with, or who i may have stronger feelings for. that is all. so i do not comparatively value them as you have suggested. in fact, i don't have any reason to believe that most people do.

most relationships do not start on the basis of initial attraction leading to approach, etc. most relationships build over time, through friendship or acquaintance. so it is not necessary to rank people on appearance alone.

that guy had a massed up idea of how to decide which women to date, so he made some awkward choices that led to loneliness. ranking people and making dating decisions based on those ranks is not likely to be a viable strategy.

frankly, EVERYONE wants to feel like a prize for someone. if a person is not dating someone that they believe is the peak of awesomeness then they are doing themselves (and their partner) a disservice. but they also need to feel worthy of that prize, or it will be wasted on them.

Of course there is a best option, that's the person you end up dating. Otherwise, you're saying that there are a lot of equal, but different options, which says more about your standards for whom you date.



They either start with initial attraction or delayed attraction caused by parameter changes.

no, there need not be any initial attraction, because it can and does build over time (for both men and women). but that involves getting to know them over a long period, which does not seem to be your aim based on your support of PUA techniques. parameters do not have to change, but once people get to know each other better they become attracted.

there are different yet equal options, yes. people are individuals and each are worthy. however, worthiness does not equal attraction.

Ditto.
THIS is the big fat "secret" of self-esteem.
...

I have found this to be virtually always true of ppl who do "rank" themselves. (Even the ones claiming/pretending high self-status.)
It's heart breaking to see, and you can see it everywhere. So don't do this.
It's a lie. If you're gonna lie to yourself at least try to be kind to yourself.
___________________________________________

This is it, and this is all - Don't rank anyone, especially not yourself.
___________________________________________

hyperlexian said it in a way I wish I could've. Good job you!
This can be really hard, but if you find yourself looking for all those tricks, clues, signs and most especially sayin "yeah-but", you are avoiding the hard thing.

...

You're different from other women because:
you're eXcellently talented w/your eye . . . stuff,
artisXically counter-pointed by your glasses,
and dramatically eXotic with your picture composition.

or...

ur rokkn at pikn k3w1 piX on teh interwebz.

BTW
Isn't "PUA techniques" just another phrase for Social Tools?
Most especially for "Small Talk" that don't flop?

Maybe that's why ppl are having a hard time with it.
Having a hammer doesn't mean having a talent.
And vice-versa.

Nothing about dogs.
Dogs are cool.
Alphas, betas, chows, even omegas -everybody loves dogs. (except those that don't, of course)

Bean a dog is an awesome way to meet women.

PUA is misunderstood in many ways. If you look at the Mystery method, what it more or less give you tools to better yourself in social interaction. You get good ways to open a conversation with strangers, and to keep that conversation going. Both in terms of what to say and how to behave. For a person who may tend to "blank out" when approaching a stranger, having let's say "Hey, my friend and I are having an argument, who lies more, men or women?" rote learned into your head, along with a suitable follow up or two helps the person get over that part.

There are things like negs, that can be questionable if used against the "wrong" target or in the wrong way. As an example, "I love that scarf, where did you buy it, I want to get my grandmother one for Christmas!" is different from "You sweat little for a fat girl".

For someone who has a fear of rejection, it can help to "build" a persona at first since that protects their "self" from rejection, thus preventing them from breaking down and crying in the fetal position in the shower for days on end.

David Deangelo has a different approach, which much more goes into things like dressing for the situation you are going to be in (IE no leather jackets and combat boots at the beach), personal grooming, positive mindsets and things like that.

Some Pick-up artists lie, but then again non-pick up artists lie as well. I believe the statistic was one lie per 10 minutes of conversation on average, and that's not just in a "trying to pick someone up" context.