if a guy sleeps with 100 ugly women is he an alpha?

Post Reply New Topic

Then you should have said you would stab child molesters with a pick axe, not PUA's. Picking up adult women who choose to have sex with you and molesting children are not comparable at all. One is reprehensible and deserves a cruel death. The other is not reprehensible at all.

So quit equating the two.

Not in Japan... But I know what you mean. I guess that is what I meant. This is a problem I will face if I raise my children in Japan. Weird old men, bleaugh! But yes I would stab child molesters with a pick axe, even getting to die by a steel edge is an honor in my book. I would rather die a warrior than die on my couch sipping sake and watching Japanese soaps.

if a guy sleeps with 100 ugly women is he an alpha?

100 ugly women, I keep rereading this.

I'm sorry I can't answer your question it's wired.

You forget one. :) (3) to make sure there is potential for an actual relationship with this person. I have read your posts, and yes, there are some women who want hookups, but these are the exceptions, not the rule. (Those would, of course, screen in a fourth & different way.)

In case you think so many women want to just hook up & are not screening for relationship potential... consider all of this advice you've been reading. Do any PUA's recommend being upfront & clear about an intention to only have a one-night stand? I strongly suspect they do not. It would be a hard sell, because most women don't want one-night stands, as those tend to emotionally damage and traumatize them.

So, lots of women screen for friend potential, or even long-term potential, if they are single, since they are often actively seeking a relationship. ( I don't personally do this. I do the safety screen, I don't understand the to-avoid-being-a-slut screening. If you think casual sex is undesirable, I guess this is something you don't have to do, or maybe I don't understand what you are saying here.)



I don't disagree. It's pretty dead on. If a male wants to meet a female at a bar, at some wild party, or even the beach, in the kind of atmosphere that wouldn't attract nicer, or at least more thoughtful, reactions, this is more likely to happen than if, for example, he were to approach her outside of a library (in daylight, of course), at a museum, or at a bookstore cafe.

You are right that we have to & do screen for safety, that these screening methods aren't particularly effective, & that these screening methods can wreak havoc with a good guy just trying to even talk to a girl... & sadly, make things exponentially more difficult for an Aspie.

It is true that guys who are funny do frequently get attention in that kind of place as well. I admit that when I was younger, I didn't understand that they weren't just friendly, fun people. It's too bad so many people use that as a tool, because it's like, as if the world of people isn't complicated enough, now, as women, we have to be extra skeptical of people who are funny... It's a shame, because it is fun to laugh. But, in today's world, that's like a red flag for a guy who is just going to waste your time & try to have sex with you. I wish the world were more innocent. I wish people could just wear t-shirts that say "dtf" or "definitely not dtf" and nary the twain should mix. lol That would probably work out better for everybody! haha

So, now that I've agreed that sure, these things are true to some extent, what is your point?

Is the point that Nice aspie guy needs to become a narcissistic abuser or at least behave exactly like him in order to get the attention of women who are unable to think for themselves? What exactly are you saying?

I have another scenario, though, a true story. Your assessment works sometimes. But sometimes, Aspies or good guys can be who they are & still get the girl.

An amazing, beautiful, intelligent, kind girl who is probably the closest thing to an angel I've met in this world gets set up on a blind date with an engineering student whose roommates, knowing he has good character & is serious-minded, so his friends give him a good reference & can say truthfully he is a very genuine, trustworthy, nice guy. She tells me about the first date and says, "He didn't say much, but he is just what I'm looking for. He doesn't play games & he isn't a charmer. He is what he is. I really like that." She didn't mention his monotone voice. Maybe she still hasn't noticed! lol She didn't say he was boring. She had nothing negative to say at all. This same girl had gone out with charming guys before & knew these guys really aren't as nice as they seem. She wanted us all to meet him right away & had a barbeque. She wanted me to check him out, because she calls me her lie detector & I saw through the other ones faster than anyone else. I asked him uncomfortable questions. He answered them awkwardly & said he didn't want any more questions. haha. I was not overfond of him emotionally that day, and didn't realize until later that it was because her other boyfriends had been overly complimentary & glib, so I didn't have to say much. haha. The other guys were kissing my butt so I would like them so my friend would trust them more! It all clicked, & that made me like him much more. After the party, she asked what I thought. I said, "Well, we aren't best friends, but he came to this barbeque & was completely out of his element because he is really crazy about you! He looked at you and smiled at you, even when you weren't paying attention. He was respectful to me when I put him on the spot but stood up to me, so he's different. This is good. He's strong. He trusts that you will like him for him & I don't have to like him. He doesn't need my approval, because he's a whole person that doesn't care what I think! He's the only guy you've dated that is his own man & is comfortable being himself & didn't feel like he had to impress me. He didn't brag or b.s. He's the only guy that didn't check me & all your friends out when he thought no one was paying attention. He was here for you and only you." She said, "Hmm. I like that." Everyone else there said, "he's fine" or "he seems nice." THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN AN ASPIE IS IN A PLACE WHERE THERE ARE NICE PEOPLE WHO AREN'T IDIOTS. =) He was uncomfortable & we knew. But, guess what? He got everybody's approval. He was clean, he wasn't mean or sleazy & most importantly, there wasn't a fake bone in his body. Now, they are married, happily married. There is no better wife than her or husband than him. And we all understand when he doesn't hang out with us too long when we visit. haha They have a little girl, who clearly has Asperger's, like her daddy, and she is fantastic.

There can BE different scenarios. The possibilities in life are as infinite as one's own imagination limited only by physics and sometime legality.

If I had not given my "approval," my friend would have still loved and chosen him. That's what people with personalities do. They think for themselves. If this Nice Aspie guy could meet people in a different way, lots of people, to increase the chances of meeting someone bright, good & pure, an individual who could think for herself he would carve out a more interesting path in life than simply becoming one more lemming doomed to share fleeting & shallow but socially approved moments with other lemmings.



Infiltrate? Um... Are we enemies? Did I miss the memo? lol

Whoa. Are you saying you present yourself as a gay male in order to deceive women? You lie & say you are a friend? Wow. (not an impressed wow.) So you want to stand up for women's "rights" to be manipulated by you but abuse their trust by lying to them & saying both that you are gay & that you are their friend when you are neither? How could you do this? Why? & do you think about this when you look in the mirror? You do understand that everything you say is suspect at this point. If you lied to them, you'd lie to others. I do not believe these women are calling men "prey" unless you've suggested it or unless you live in a very strange corner of the world. I AM a girl/woman. I've had a very wide variety of friends, many of them very blunt people, many of them very open-minded sexually, & i have never, ever, ever heard of anything even remotely like that. No offense, but if you can't be trusted, I have to rely on my own experience.

& consent? Can you honestly tell me... honestly, that these women are INFORMED that it's a one-night stand by any PUA's? I've read the stuff, & it says not to do that... So how do they know what they are consenting to? Most of the literature I read suggests "boyfriending." If tactics of this level of deception are used, she isn't consenting to a one night stand. She is consenting to having sex in something she has been deliberately deceived into thinking is a relationship. In fact, these women you are infiltrating aren't CONSENTING to hanging out with you. They are consenting to hang out with a gay friend, not you. I don't think you understand the concept of consent or choice.

Others in this thread rightly comment that people see what they want to see. But you know what? It is NOT NOBLE and it is NOT GOOD and it is NOT KIND and it is NOT COOL to take advantage of someone's unfortunate inability to sift what reality there is out of the muddled dust of human interactions with people who are deliberately vague in order to take advantage of them. They don't have a clue what is happening! People with AS should know how messed up this is!

Is roping someone into a pyramid scheme when you know they will never see a dime but you get $1000 also not "reprehensible" because it's just totally fine to use someone's hope & trust to your own benefit & to their detriment? Is it ok, because they consented & should have known better? Is it ethical? Is it the way we should treat each other? Is that the kind of world you want to live in?

(I am not talking about clarified consent, as in, you actually explain to the woman it's a one-night stand & she's still into it. Of course, I have no business in that.)

I've read that telling women this is liberating & feminist in order to make them feel like it's socially acceptable and that you won't judge them about it is another tactic. It's just another con.

Is anything you write from your own head or is it all out of some Player's Handbook? Are you simply parroting? YOU are exactly the kind of person that probably was really cool BEFORE you started studying how to treat people poorly & rationalize it to yourself adequately. I can't believe anyone as articulate as you are believes this malarkey. Think. Is this who you want to be? Is this who you ARE?

I very sincerely hope you sort this out soon, for your sake & for the sake of others. I hope you reread Popsicle's response as well before you go proselytizing to vulnerable people who might be in danger of taking you seriously.

Unless you have some kind of catharsis, appletheclown is right to keep you away from his sister no matter how old she is... & maybe away from his grandmother, pets & any houseplants he has, too. lol I can't believe you would think anyone would want you anywhere near a female they cared about! & you, trying to make him feel bad for it? Really.

I'm pretty sure the he used the words "gay friend" to mean that these women relate to him in an entirely non-sexual platonic way, the way they would with a gay guy, and not to mean that he is deceiving them.

He doesn't seem like the type who would lie to people in that way.

I hope you are right. :) That would be a fantastic thing to be wrong about. He mentioned infiltrating. & usually, if people think you're gay, they ask, so it seemed like a purposeful, Ulysses-like ruse.

No straight guy would do this gay guy trick because it would destroy his chances with ALL girls of his surrounding.

I will respond to the rest of what you wrote later since I am busy right now. However, just to clarify, I have never deceived anyone. I do, however, frequently care about my appearance, which can throw people off instinctively. Sometimes, women actually know I'm straight but still instinctively treat me like I am gay or a "girl." It started when I was too shy to date, around age 18. Strangely, on a few occasions, I have been dating a girl and invited to go out with her friends on a sort of girls night. Talk about weird.

Women will often treat any guy who is nice, funny, nice-looking, and apparently aware of their emotional states, but who does not hit on them, as a "gay friend." It's funny how it works, but it does. I don't know why, but sometimes, I do not feel like hitting on anyone. Sometimes, I just like to have fun without pressure, and anyone who follows my posts on this site knows that my feelings about sex are ambivalent and cyclical.

I can snap into flirt mode when I want to. But have you ever considered that maybe--just maybe--I don't want to sometimes? It's really a lot of pressure to be the "man" all the time. The use of the term "infiltrate" was a joke.

Also, I have never read any PUA materials. I am completely unfamiliar with the movement or the websites. I have learned a few tricks from my black male friends, just a few; they are experts. So, I guess maybe I have learned PUA stuff on the "street," but I honestly wouldn't know. I guess I feel flattered if you think I sound like PUA's because that means I came up with almost all of it independently, which means I must be pretty smart.

Last edited by Tyri0n on 13 May 2013, 2:35 am, edited 7 times in total.

Unless your going out group is separate from your dating group. But otherwise, definitely.

Well, trying to recall exactly what I was thinking and then quantify it is difficult. I will just reiterate in a slightly different way since I am the same person today as when I wrote it.

Risks of rape and harassment do exist for women in every culture. (I am not saying they never exist for men or children.) As for being treated like a second class citizen it depends how one defines or perhaps, how one has experienced 'being treated as a second class citizen.' It needn't be something like having to stay indoors or ask permission to get a job or go to school, or not being able to drive a car, or go to the mall alone. It can be things like 60 percent of pay for the same work, being objectified more readily, or an industry springing up targeting women as prey.



"Hating" is a buzzword people often use to flip the onus back onto the person making a salient point against something.

By "some women" did you mean to include myself?

Consensual is only consensual if things are transparent. It doesn't only mean the woman not being under the influence of drugs or alcohol, so that she cannot think clearly. To be truly consensual she can't have been purposely manipulated either. I can already sense that irrelevant analogies will be made about things like "isn't it manipulation if a woman wears makeup to look better and attract a mate?" No there is no comparison to that and purposely lying to a woman or manipulating her emotions in order to pump and dump her. Pump and dump is a primary aim for many 'pickup artists.' They are no more an artist at relationships than a person making a sandwich at a Subway is automatically or accurately an 'artist.' (To explain that for people who don't know what Subway is: they call their employees "sandwich artists." It isn't meant as a putdown in any way and I actually like some of their food. It's a pun.)

I am also very curious why you expound upon what pickup artists 'really are taught to do,' when you say later you haven't read any of the material and are not familiar with it? You say you've simply heard about it second hand through friends. Those 'friends' may or may not be practicing the classes accurately. They might be leaving out a lot of what they really do, when they regale you with their scores; or they might be making up their own version of PUA (maybe tamer than the real one?) as they go.



At any rate I think like MoonriseGirl says it's dangerous to teach this stuff to impressionable people looking for honest advice on how to approach women, especially if you aren't familiar with what it is to begin with. PUA is misogynist at its core and seriously objectifies the female gender. One of its core concepts is that what women "really" want is to be abused. All that stuff about "what you all really want is a caveman to hit you over the head and drag you to his cave." Then the guy goes out and plops a RUFI into the woman's drink at a bar. No, that is not what women "really want." (No, I am not claiming that PUA literally teaches men to drug women. Not unless false hope or misleading intentions is a drug. It does teach what some define as "emotional rape.")

"Mystery" is a slick former magician, in my opinion a con artist who has taken advantage of both males and females in making a fortune off desperation, and peddling bad advice. Your word "infiltrate" is interesting since many men into the PUA lifestyle see women as the other, the enemy. PUA jargon only emphasizes that type of thinking.



You keep saying what PUA is about but you haven't read it? I don't see how THAT is "completely honest."

I have read as much as I can about it online as well as watched both TV series in which Mystery (the guy who is the main teacher of PUA) teaches his methods. I also know a man who was sort of his right-hand man, and he was bragging without realizing it, about all this stuff. There are also multiple 'how to' PUA videos online. It's ALL about deception and masks and costumes and 'peacocking' and doing anything in order for the male to get laid. I don't see how you can really think it's completely honest, but I go back to your profession that you haven't actually read any of or even read about, the PUA stuff.



No they don't.

They advise pretending to be harmless, pretending to be gay, comforting a woman who is upset only to take advantage of that vulnerability and have sex with her, flirting with someone else when your real 'target' is another woman, so the 'target' will feel worse about herself and try to get your attention to feel better again, 'negging' a woman or insulting her subtly so she feels down on herself and will be more susceptible to your 'pickup' attempts (basically lowering her self esteem until she will have sex with you) etc.

PUA is anything BUT honest or straightforward. It is a system for manipulating women into bed, simple as that.

Well, most work injury cases are men and men are the first ones to be sent to death in wars, and the latest to be rescued.

So women are 'second class' in one way (pay) while men are the 'expendable class' in another.

It isn't only about pay, and it is very difficult to explain. If one hasn't been sensitized to it or grown up experiencing it, a lot of it is not going to be obvious. Also, it used to be much worse in the US at least than it is today. Still, when women can't even walk safely at night? When women have to concern themselves with things men never do? (I've never heard a man say "I can't live on a first floor apartment. I don't feel safe.") There is a lot of disparity.

I don't have a frame of reference, at current one at least, for your example of first to go to war, last to be rescued. Women serve in the military and have for some time. In Israel for example it's required of both genders. I can't really comment on the work injury example either other than to say most women I know just walk things off. Giving birth isn't a cake walk. Women supposedly are more pain tolerant.

As for more 'expendable' in today's society: From my point of view it has seemed like women gained more risk without gaining more reward. The glass ceiling still exists; men still run most things in the world; and yet women are expected since the 'gender revolution' (which happened before most here were probably alive) to open their own doors, have their own careers, serve in the military and all things that traditionally had been a male province. Yet the ratio of rape in the military is abysmal, nothing is done about it to speak of, careers are limited even today and have glass ceilings, and having a door opened for you is a courtesy most people adore. In short we get to split the check but still make 60 percent of the pay.

If the Titanic sunk today, there would be no 'women and children first' - yet it is still men first in most things.

Females have always been in danger of rape but it's not because they're second-class citizens. You can give the woman all the rights she wants, she'll always be at risk of being raped by a certain subgroup of men.

The pay bit is misleading. Nobody really knows what exactly is behind the difference between both genders in terms of overall pay. Feminists only assume it's gender discrimination, but nowadays, this isn't much of a case anymore, and I suspect it has more to do with women's choices and tendency to not negotiate for better pay.

Of course you won't, because he would be called a coward and men and women would laugh at him, men are expected to not be afraid of these things yet the risks are real. But men choose to shut up on these matters.





Even in Israel, most of the footmen soldiers are men, those are ones who have the risk to die the most, but female pilots bombing a country with no Anti-air (like mine) capabilities? not so much.





Are you in the US, because there it's 77% of the pay, not 60. A portion of it is explained by determined reasons, another portion is not (which may be the discrimination and other things).




It happened with that Italian cruise, and the men were been mocked in the press for being cowards.

Which only means that it's still socially expected for men to be rescued the latest.