More scientific proof that cocky-funny works to create attraction.

[phersurf]

Study after study shows that laughing is hardly ever in response to funny things. Humans are 10 times more likely to talk to themselves than to laugh to themselves. Laughing is the universal human speech mechanism to gain approval from others and build rapport. Pay attention to social interactions and you’ll see this in action. We laugh to demonstrate we’re part of the group, which 10,000 years ago was neccessary for survival.

Think of a company boardroom meeting, the CEO will make jokes and barely crack a smile, while his subordinates will all laugh. Movies even make fun of this by having the biggest brown-noser laughing the loudest. Think of the cool group in High School laughing at the outcasts. The lower status person will always laugh more in a social interaction than the higher status person. An alpha male will hardly ever laugh.

How does this relate to cocky-funny? When you bust a girl’s balls by making fun of her (in a funny way) and have her laughing (making sure not ot laugh yourself), you’re demonstrating that you’re the higher status person. She is laughing to seek your approval. And, ironically, the better looking the woman, the better this works. Why? Because she is so used to having men do anything to gain her approval. Complimenting her, buying her things, paying too much attention to her. This behavior shows that she is the higher status person, she is the prize. Women are never attracted to lower status men! Woman may go out with these guys, they may even marry them (they’re good providers), but she will never have that deep gut level attraction to him.

Just think about this intuitively for a minute. Picture a woman and a man talking at a party where the woman is laughing consistently and the man is hardly laughing. Contrast this to a man laughing and the woman hardly laughing. If you’re like me, you can actually picture the woman in the second example looking around for a way to get out of this encounter!


* Laughing strengthens bonds of comradeship (Van Hooff 1967:59).

* Laughter is more social than humorous (Van Hooff 1967:59).

* http://www.aaronwall.com/archives/000279.html

*http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/neuro/neuro04/web2/kcoveleskie.html

[Jpeg]

haha, looks like there's another person here that has been introduced to david deangelo ;) And the women don't even know what hit em...

[chicago]

david deangelo is amazing,

[Jpeg]

Do i hear an AMEN?!

[Watcher]

quick ways to bend women to youre will and mess with their natural defensive mechanisms - and the fun thing is anyone can learn this skill even without pheromonal backup

[phersurf]

There are some David D naysayers on this board!

They come from several different points of view.

The "just be yourself" group. The "you can't create attraction, either she is attracted to you or she isn't". Or the most delusional, "just wait long enough and the right woman will come along".

The first group are probably "naturals", guys that do this stuff without thinking. Or guys that pursue women until they give in.

The second are the guys that ignore the fact that, like every other animal on the planet, humans have mating rituals. If men don't do their part, the woman will not be attracted to him.

The third are those that are hoping to win the lottery without doing any work.

[belgareth]

The only point that you leave out is that many, many men find good women without the David D. stuff. Are they all naturals? Or is it possible that there are other ways to attract women besides that? It may even be possible that some women don't fall for the David D. methods or even respect a more honest (probably not the best word but...) approach. It's also likely that environment, personality type, personal awareness and many other factors play into how well it works on who.

[Undertow]

I don't think he's claiming cocky and funny is the only way to attract females. I think he's just claiming it works extremely well. Also, David D seems to be more about the inner game (confidence and self-esteem) than the outer game, such as cocky and funny. I would assume most of those guys who meet great women and are able to attract women at least have the inner game down, as it is the most important part.

[metropolitan]

i find all that "speed seduction" material to be totally creepy. it's just a plain old mind fuck. "mindfuck for dummies" manuals.
stuff like that seemed fun when i was a college guy, but once you have been in a serious relationship (or more than one serious relationship) you see it for what it is.

[belgareth]

I think the word delusional in reference to us 'naysayers' was what made me think he was implying otherwise. I don't doubt for a minute that it does work on some women and in some situations but don't accept a blanket statement that it always works or even that is is the best approach for everybody or anybody. I've also heard the women that hang around here ridicule guys that have tried those techniques on them. There is the possibility that they were inept, though. I wasn't there and don't know all the details.

[Jpeg]

hehe, well those of you davd D naysayers out there, i thank you for the lessoning of competition. *bow* now on to the ladies! Let's just say, David D teaches you how to be yourself without being a loser/desperate freak. Of course he talks about SOME teckniques and stuffs... but he more emphasises on being yourself, and how to find what being "yourself" really is. note the famous line, "Just be yourself!". Buying flowers/gifts/food for women is not being yourself, that's called manipulation. Kissing ass to women and trying to be super nice is also manipulation. Back when i was doing it, i was so convincing that i actualy believed i was just that nice. After learning stuff from David D, it's finally... let me loose? haha. Well, David D isn't for everyone i must say, but if you ARE one of those guys that always seems to be put off as "the good friend" in all relationships, i, and i am sure many others would strongly recommend you getting his stuff.

[belgareth]

You need a book to learn that?

[Jpeg]

some people do ^_^

[belgareth]

Ok, then I need to ask: Is what they learn from this book real or an act?

[Jpeg]

well basicaly, what i've learned is that what i USED to think was real is an act. And the way i am now is real. (no more buying tons of flowers, chocolates, ass kissing)

[Undertow]

Belgareth, most of the techniques he teaches for improving self-esteem and confidence are NLP (neuro-linguistic programming). Basically, this just involves changing your thought patterns from negative or self-limiting thoughts to positive thoughts. So no, I wouldn't call it an act at all. Many years before I'd ever heard of NLP or David D, I pulled myself out of depression by changing my thoughts like that. So I sure hope that what he's teaching isn't an act, because otherwise my happiness is fake and that would mean I'm still extremely depressed.

[belgareth]

The idea that you can buy affection with cards, flowers and gifts is a bunch of tripe probably promoted by the same companies that have created a couple dozen special days as reasons to get you to give those type gifts. If you aren't compatible, you aren't. It's that simple and no amount of technique, inner game, pheromones, flowers or gifts is going to change that. If your a spineless worm or massively depressing to be around, that's something you need to work on and maybe a book will help you, maybe it won't.

At the same time, you can be a self confident, independent gentleman and attract all the women you can handle. It isn't difficult and other than learning to be yourself and treating everybody decently without ever becoming submissive, it should be almost natural.

[belgareth]

Belgareth, most of the techniques he teaches for improving self-esteem and confidence are NLP (neuro-linguistic programming). Basically, this just involves changing your thought patterns from negative or self-limiting thoughts to positive thoughts. So no, I wouldn't call it an act at all. Many years before I'd ever heard of NLP or David D, I pulled myself out of depression by changing my thoughts like that. So I sure hope that what he's teaching isn't an act, because otherwise my happiness is fake and that would mean I'm still extremely depressed.
I can accept that. Happiness is a choice we make, IMO. Too many people buy into the idea that the world around them is the cause of their unhappiness. That's a self perpetuating circle of false beliefs. I'm glad you made the decision to to take control of your life, be happy and enjoy yourself. It feels good to give yourself the power to make those choices, doesn't it?

[Undertow]

What you just said is exactly what David D tries to teach people. The pure fact of the matter is that many guys DO become submissive towards women, especially attractive women, and that is what he tries to get them to overcome.

This whole cocky & funny thing is blown out of the water. That's a technique. What he really tries to teach people is that they shouldn't be submissive towards women. And while this may seem natural to you, many guys are very submissive when they find a girl they are attracted to. I would say the majority of guys I know are submissive to females they are attracted to. Look at the dynamics of today. How many kids today have strong father figures in their lives?

Not me, for one. My mother definitely ran my household, and what do you think she taught me in regards to women? "Treat them right." What does that translate to when you're a kid and have no masculine example to follow in your house? You get the guys of today, who are taught to basically be spineless worms as you put it.

David D's whole program has NOTHING to do with treating women badly. It has everything to do with maintaining your personal boundries, which a lot of guys forget when they're attracted to a female.

Bottom line, most of what you're saying is exactly what he says. However, instead of just calling guys "spineless worms", he tries to help them in the right direction and gives them techniques to try and get them out of that frame of thinking. It's easy to say, "just be confident." He actually gives you different methods that may help you achieve confidence. It has nothing to do with making incompatible people work...because that's not possible. He even says that all the time. I'm not really sure where you got that idea. I've rambled enough, but that's my view on the whole program.

[phersurf]

Here's an analogy. Everyone knows that peacocks use there tail feathers to attract peahens. If they do it right, they get laid. If you took a peacock and trained it not to display its tail feathers, it would NEVER attract a peahen. Even if its tail feathers were perfectly healthy and attractive.

Many modern human males (especially in the US!) have had their "tail feather display" instinct trained out of them by culture, religion, upbringing, etc. Men that are consistantly able to attract women without using David D are doing something that women find naturally attractive (unconsciouslly).

The other misconception is that David D teach stuff that manipultes women. So untrue. As Undertow says, most of what he teaches is Inner Game. If you have the right inner game, it almost doesn't matter what "techniques" you use.

[Undertow]

I can accept that. Happiness is a choice we make, IMO. Too many people buy into the idea that the world around them is the cause of their unhappiness. That's a self perpetuating circle of false beliefs. I'm glad you made the decision to to take control of your life, be happy and enjoy yourself. It feels good to give yourself the power to make those choices, doesn't it?

Most definitely. I've always been a big believer in personal responsibility, which I think helped me a lot in that regard. I think the hardest part for me now is when I have a friend who is caught in the cycle of thinking that I was, but when I try to explain how I got out of that way of thinking, they just ignore me or say "I can't do it." That angers me a lot, because it's almost like they are refusing to relinquish the role of the victim in their head. Ah well, you can't help those who don't want to be helped.

[belgareth]

The original point of this thread is CF, if you'll go back and look. CF is most often an act and often causes people to come across as jerks. And when they do manage to attract a woman, what happens when they let the act slip? It often blows the whole relationship when she figures out she's been conned. Pretty dumb thing to do if you are interested in more than just getting laid.

You are probably right about the source of the lack of self respect. I was fortunate enough to have good teachers.

[Undertow]

I'm inclined to agree with you about the whole cocky-funny thing. Even the man who brought that phrase to fame says he wishes he hadn't mentioned it, because people cling to it so tightly. I think what he was trying to accomplish with that catch phrase was trying to get the guys to realize that they shouldn't treat the girl differently than they would their male friends. Most of his examples of cocky/funny are things that I would normally just say to my guy friends when we're all busting on each other. But guys wouldn't normally do that around a female because they had been taught that it was impolite or not proper behavior for courting.

However, I think people do latch on to that whole cocky/funny thing way too tightly.

[belgareth]

And that is what I hear women make fun of!

[phersurf]

If you're comming across as a jerk, you're doing it wrong.

I've had women look stunned after I said something, then bust out laughing and actually say, "oh, you're a jerk!" or "I can't believe you just said that!". But if they don't say it while laughing, you are being a jerk.

True jerks or "bad boys" are extremely attractive to women. Why is that? Because they do many of the things that women find instinctually attractive, albeit in an unhealthy way.

[belgareth]

Ok, I'm willing to concede that what a lot of the guys have talked about on the forum has misled me. But if you'll go back and read some of the stuff you'll see why I believe that way. For me, being what I am is far more important than the transitional pleasure of getting laid by some woman I'll likely never see again. I outgrew that before I could legally drink.

[phersurf]

That's not what David D teaches (unless that's what the individual wants).

How are you going to find a trully great woman if you don't date quite a few? Most men "settle" because they are so happy to have a woman be with them.

What I've learned with David D is that I'm in control (usually) of the direction of the relationship. If I want it to be purelly physical, it will be. If I want a long term relationship with a great woman (which is what I really want) , then I take it in that direction.

[esk6969]

The idea that you can buy affection with cards, flowers and gifts is a bunch of tripe probably promoted by the same companies that have created a couple dozen special days as reasons to get you to give those type gifts. .
Bel, it is SO funny that you mention that. Just a couple of weeks ago, we had a "bad" mother's day at my house. "Bad" because my wife, poor thing, bought into the delusion that somehow, maybe, this would be the magical year when our young children would finally realize all of the wonderful things my wife does for them as their mother, and treat her extra special for just one day.

By 9:30 in the morning, she was so furious at their behavior that she literally hurled the door to the dishwasher hard enough at the ground to bend the metal in it.

Needless to say, her fury and anger was a result of unmet (and wildly unrealistic) expectations. Expectations that had been set up by those very companies that you mention that create these holidays that then motivate people to do all sorts of things out of guilt, rather than sincerity. Except for young children of course, who are smart enough to realize.... it's just another day.

After this fiasco, one that is repeated with every such holiday, every such year, I decided enough was enough. I declared a decree in our household; something I rarely do. The decree was: No more "greeting card holidays". No more holidays that do not celebrate something of either religious or interpersonal significgance. Basically, no more holidays that end with "Day", such as Mother's Day, Father's Day, Valentines' Day (which was another fiasco this year), etc. I then ordered specific instructions NOT to acknowledge any differences this year on Father's "Day". I want no gifts; no socks; no ties; no cake. What I want, if anything, for Father's "Day" this year (almost seems insulting, there should be just one such day), is the freedom to disavow it, without guilt.


If you aren't compatible, you aren't. It's that simple and no amount of technique, inner game, pheromones, flowers or gifts is going to change that. If your a spineless worm or massively depressing to be around, that's something you need to work on and maybe a book will help you, maybe it won't.

At the same time, you can be a self confident, independent gentleman and attract all the women you can handle. It isn't difficult and other than learning to be yourself and treating everybody decently without ever becoming submissive, it should be almost natural.
Well, maybe it "should" be natural, but for most guys, it isn't. Most guys didn't grow up with good examples. Most guys grew up with parents who's lives and marriages either became traps, and felt like bitter disappointments, or were so bad, they ended in divorce. Most of the men I work with, are complete betas, and completely submissive to their wives at home, as they probably have been since the start of the relationship. And, as a very general rule of thumb, it seems the higher their status in business (this is for employees, not those who are self-employed), the lower their status in the home. I also tend to think this is usually a by-product of these men being so submissive to their wives, that they "have" to work extra hard, to make the extra money, to buy all of the things that the wife feels are necessary. How many men, when you get them alone, tell you that their fondest dream is to get the "right" house, in the best neighborhood, and send their kids to the "best" (i.e., most expensive) schools? Most men, left to their own devices, would rather spend their time and money on things like boats and golf clubs, and usually, given the choice, would rather spend more TIME, period, rather than spend MONEY instead.

[Undertow]

Ok, I'm willing to concede that what a lot of the guys have talked about on the forum has misled me. But if you'll go back and read some of the stuff you'll see why I believe that way. For me, being what I am is far more important than the transitional pleasure of getting laid by some woman I'll likely never see again. I outgrew that before I could legally drink.

Heh, that is completely understandable. I would think the same thing based on a lot of what I've read about David D's stuff here. I was just trying to clear up what I got out of the program to kind of counter what other people have written here before.

[Jpeg]

*sniff* I am not alone in this world =*) God really did create other people like me... *WAIL* You guys are great. lol.... anywaiz.... u know... i have an idea, i remember reading up on a thread on andro 1, the beta mone or osmething like that. It supposedly makes girls really happy. I'm thinking that if you DO use cocky+funny with that, you can come off as more of a jerk and get away with more because of the happy affect from andro 1. And i'm thinking that by increasing the threashold, it may be just that much more effective. ;) it's just a thought.

[Phan]

Here is a distilled version of what I got from DeAngelo and Jeffries:


DeAngelo: Be confident, and rather than fawning over a woman or using gimmicks, treat her like you would treat one of your friends with teasing and humor.

Jeffries: Be confident, and create positive associations in her mind by connecting yourself with emotions that she would like to have using imagery and suggestion.

The first seems natural to me while the second does not.

I think a better way of explaining "cocky and funny" (or at least the way _I_ choose to interpret it) is:
Which is more attractive: Being relaxed and confident while making her laugh with some subtle and friendly teasing (teasing in the mocking sense, not in the sexual sense), or acting like a foot stool? Very attractive women know that the demand for them is much greater than the supply, and men know this too. Many attractive women are suspicious of the motives of men because of their realization of self-worth. C&F disarms them, allowing them to set suspicion aside. Many men allow themselves to be overcome by the reality of the supply/demand situation. C&F allows them to be engaging rather than tiresome.

Of course, ideally you should be confident and humorous/teasing because that's the way you naturally are. If it's an act, you've already defeated the purpose.

[Gegogi]

The original post appears to be gross steoreotyping and/or brainwashing from the De Angelo loser guy religion (fuckenfast.com). Moreover, it takes a lot more than being a jerk to lower a woman's status. If it appears to work from time to time, that woman was already ready and willing to step into a subservient role and didn't need any encouragement from a cocky-funny punk. Or perhaps she wants you to think you have the upper hand (my sister loved to play dumb & helpless with guys to make them feel good and do her bidding). Successful relationships are fostered by honest communication, not childish games.

[phersurf]

The original post appears to be gross steoreotyping and/or brainwashing from the De Angelo loser guy religion (fuckenfast.com). Moreover, it takes a lot more than being a jerk to lower a woman's status. If it appears to work from time to time, that woman was already ready and willing to step into a subservient role and didn't need any encouragement from a cocky-funny punk. Or perhaps she wants you to think you have the upper hand (my sister loved to play dumb & helpless with guys to make them feel good and do her bidding). Successful relationships are fostered by honest communication, not childish games.

No reason to look any further. That's it. You figured it all out.

So if a guy does this stuff naturally and has successful relationships with women, that's OK. But if some guys need some assistance, they're playing childish games!

I guess all the authors of the following books have it all wrong also,

The MAting Mind: How Sexual Choice Shaped the Evolution of Human Nature

Sperm Wars: THe Science of Sex

The Evolution of Desire: Strategies of Human Mating

The Red Queen: Sex and the Evolution of Human Nature

[belgareth]

That's not what David D teaches (unless that's what the individual wants).

How are you going to find a trully great woman if you don't date quite a few? Most men "settle" because they are so happy to have a woman be with them.

What I've learned with David D is that I'm in control (usually) of the direction of the relationship. If I want it to be purelly physical, it will be. If I want a long term relationship with a great woman (which is what I really want) , then I take it in that direction.Simple enough, I don't date any woman that I don't think meets what I am looking for in a woman. Game playing, dominance crap, all that petty BS that gets in the way of honest relationships is usually apparent from only a few minutes of listening to most people. Want to watch ol' Belgareth beat a hasty retreat from a woman? Show me even the slightest hint of that nonsense. Is it perfect? No! I'm divorced so it isn't perfect. People do grow apart, that's a whole other subject.

[DrSmellThis]

That's a good point in that if you focus on observing the woman and evaluating her as a potential aquaintance, you'll be using no pickup techniques whatsoever; yet you'll appear secure and confident.

Then, if you decide you like that person, you'll have an immediate method of getting along with her by genuinely enjoying her company rather than having to focus on impressing her. It will not be a self-conscious thing.

This is only one aspect, of course. I've written elsewhere about the need to master the reality of the situation in various ways before adding tricks and gimmicks.

People will always choose the whole cake over just icing.

[TRock]

there's really know need need for scientific advice. just look at all the best looking women that are attracted to bad boys and jerks. average and above average girls don't respond to c&f and dyd inner game. their self esteem can be knocked off balance at anytime because they know they come in 2nd to all the hottest girls. just being yourself will work on the 7's and below but not the 8's and higher.

take me for example as a cool and good looking afc, i still had to settle for girls and never had control. being myself led me to afcdom. now as a cool and good looking guy that absorbs everything dyd i'm irresistible to every woman i meet. one of my buddies who you can categorize as tall dark and hansome never had success with picking women. he had to be chosen by women versus him choosing them. helping him just improve his inner game has done wonders for his game. the naysayers can keep being naysers more women for me. just hope i don't roll up and take your girl from you.

[PHP 87]

The original post appears to be gross steoreotyping and/or brainwashing from the De Angelo loser guy religion (fuckenfast.com). Moreover, it takes a lot more than being a jerk to lower a woman's status. If it appears to work from time to time, that woman was already ready and willing to step into a subservient role and didn't need any encouragement from a cocky-funny punk. Or perhaps she wants you to think you have the upper hand (my sister loved to play dumb & helpless with guys to make them feel good and do her bidding). Successful relationships are fostered by honest communication, not childish games.

I don't think you have a clue about what D'Angelo teaches.

Regardless, women like a guy that's confident and has a sense of humor, which is what C&F is about.

D'Angelo doesn't teach guys how to be a jerk, as that only gets you women with low self-esteem.

[PHP 87]

i find all that "speed seduction" material to be totally creepy. it's just a plain old mind fuck. "mindfuck for dummies" manuals.
stuff like that seemed fun when i was a college guy, but once you have been in a serious relationship (or more than one serious relationship) you see it for what it is.


Ross Jeffries was the first guy I learned about in the seduction community, but the whole "patterns" business sounds unnatural, manipulative and yes, creepy.

I did learn many things from RJ about inner and outer game, but his language patterning wasn't for me.

Also, RJ has a habit of trashing his competitors, which reeks of insecurity and does not inspire confidence.

And, he wants his students to be successful, but can't handle it when they become more successful than him.

I like D'Angelo, as it suits my personality (Confident with a sense of humor) so I'm congruent with it as it seems more natural.

I've also have been gravitating towards "direct" game as taught by guys like "Gunwitch" and "Badboy"

What they teach is very natural, what man is/was before being feminized and emasculated by society.

Since going "direct" my results have gotten even better, and this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Also, no complicated NLP type stuff to learn, no "routines" to learn, no complicated "Mystery Method" to learn.

No palm reading, handwriting analysis, no magic tricks, no gay "peacocking" and all that other stuff that is supplicant behavior.

Just learning to be a Man, the way nature intended.

[Tiger4]

How does this relate to cocky-funny? When you bust a girl’s balls by making fun of her (in a funny way) and have her laughing (making sure not ot laugh yourself), you’re demonstrating that you’re the higher status person. She is laughing to seek your approval. And, ironically, the better looking the woman, the better this works. Why? Because she is so used to having men do anything to gain her approval. Complimenting her, buying her things, paying too much attention to her. This behavior shows that she is the higher status person, she is the prize. Women are never attracted to lower status men! Woman may go out with these guys, they may even marry them (they’re good providers), but she will never have that deep gut level attraction to him.

You've made some excellent points. This is all very interesting information. One thing about women is that they are very perceptive (particularly the attractive ones). From talking to my sister, women know right away when a man is trying to make a pass at them, there is no way of hiding it. Cockiness will only get a man so far. Many times, a cocky man will come across as a real jerk or A** hole to women. Even men who are funny will sometimes come across as goof balls and or losers (particularly to intelligent women).

There is no big secret weapon when looking for women. I don't like to concentrate on a particular strategy, but on what to avoid. From my experiences, these are the things to avoid when looking to pick up women:

Avoid pick up lines
Most good looking women have heard them all. You're never going to get any woman with any class by using a pick up line.

Never beg a woman for anything
This makes you appear to be a wimp.

Don't smile or laugh at a woman first
If you do, you are putting the power in her hands.

Don't ask for her phone number
If you really find that you have a lot in common, you wouldn't have to ask. She will either give it to you without asking or you will feel comfortable enough to suggest that you should exchange numbers with her.

If you get signals such as bad body language leave her alone and move on
Arms crossed across chest, body turned away, lack of eye contact etc. are all signs that she just doesn't want to be bothered with you. Don't waste your time because you aren't going to get anywhere.

[belgareth]

You've made some excellent points. This is all very interesting information. One thing about women is that they are very perceptive (particularly the attractive ones). From talking to my sister, women know right away when a man is trying to make a pass at them, there is no way of hiding it. Cockiness will only get a man so far. Many times, a cocky man will come across as a real jerk or A** hole to women. Even men who are funny will sometimes come across as goof balls and or losers (particularly to intelligent women).

There is no big secret weapon when looking for women. I don't like to concentrate on a particular strategy, but on what to avoid. From my experiences, these are the things to avoid when looking to pick up women:

Avoid pick up lines
Most good looking women have heard them all. You're never going to get any woman with any class by using a pick up line.

Never beg a woman for anything
This makes you appear to be a wimp.

Don't smile or laugh at a woman first
If you do, you are putting the power in her hands.

Don't ask for her phone number
If you really find that you have a lot in common, you wouldn't have to ask. She will either give it to you without asking or you will feel comfortable enough to suggest that you should exchange numbers with her.

If you get signals such as bad body language leave her alone and move on
Arms crossed across chest, body turned away, lack of eye contact etc. are all signs that she just doesn't want to be bothered with you. Don't waste your time because you aren't going to get anywhere.You've made some good points yourself. The only one I'd disagree with is smiling and the implied control. It doesn't really matter who smiles first if you stay in control of yourself and the rest of the situaton. There's a philosophy to do with economics and combat both that can be applied here. He who has the ability to destroy something controls it. Rather obvious but a lot of people miss the implications. As applied to social situations: The person willing to break off and walk away controls the situation.

Another interesting similarity/difference. We don't exchange phone numbers, we swap business cards with the expectation that the information will be handled professionally.

Participating in this discussion yesterday and thinking it over last night I come to a couple conclusions. In general, Gegogi is right, IMO, about your actions needing to be real. It may not matter for very brief encounters but for anything longer than a few days it will matter because nobody can keep up an act for any length of time and most women are not stupid. They will figure it out and resent it.

I've maintained that environment and personality make a difference. It really does! Gegogi is a professor and his social environment is in large part determined by that. His level of self confidence is as well. I am a businessman and computer jockey. My social environment is determined by that. When I meet somebody, my level of confidence and social status is reflected in how I stand, walk, talk and so on as is Gegogi's. Walk into his office or classroom and tell me who is dominant.

Last night I attended a business event filled mostly with other business professionals. Each of them is a leader to one degree or another and had to be met as peers. To attempt to use dominance tactics or CF would have alienated at least half of them. That applies to both men and women. This isn't a bar, club or school populated by a general cross section of society or even a single age group. There were people ranging from young 20 somethings up to senior citizens. The thing we all have in common is that we are all leaders and dynamic people. I'm going to post it in another thread but I got several good hits last night from people as strong willed and self confident as I am. There are a few who come on as subservient and the majority disregard them. There are others that come across as controlling and are rejected. The dynamics in that room were fascinating to watch.

As a side note on Phersurf's mention of books. "Chariots of the Gods" was well written and documented. It was followed up by a number of other books on the same subject, also well written and documented. If you have read those books and done any follow up research you'll know what was wrong with them. Because somebody can write a book or perform a study does not prove their point beyond dispute. In any of the hard sciences studies are considered a starting point. From there you develop an hypothosis or theory then create experiments in which to discover if it is right or wrong and why. Most experiments are conducted hundreds or thousands of times and verified by others before being accepted as real.

[Tiger4]

When I meet somebody, my level of confidence and social status is reflected in how I stand, walk, talk and so on as is Gegogi's. Walk into his office or classroom and tell me who is dominant.

Many base their social status on their occupations, which can sometimes not be a very good thing. I think occupational titles are rather limiting. I am a lot more than what I do for a living and I carry and present myself as such. I work as a security guard, but I strike most people I meet as very intellecutual and mellow. My job has absolutely nothing to do with how I carry myself. I'm well educated and like to read a lot. I'm dominant and very confident when talking about things which I'm knowledgeble. But I try not to be overbearing.

One of my bosses claims he has been successful with picking up women but after listening to him, one would think otherwise. He tends to studder when he is unsure of something or under stress. When he's successful, I'm sure he doesn't studder.

Dominance has its place but when one is too dominant, they can get of peoples nerves. Off duty police officers for example are relatively easy to pick out of a crowd. They like to seize control of situations. But when they do this they can come across as overbearing and bully -like.

Your communications style and how you present yourself are the main things to concentrate on.

[phersurf]

I love stiring the pot with posts abut David D!

I love reading the posts by people that assume they know what he is all about and what he teaches.

HE doesn't teach speed seduction, he doesn't teach you to pick up low self esteme women just to sleep with them (although you can if that's what you want), he doesn't teach you to be manipulative.

99% of what he teaches is to become a better man that will naturally attract women.

[belgareth]

Many of us have been involved in what we do for so long that it is an integral part of our lives. Gegogi and I both chose our professions because they fit into our personalities. It makes perfect sense for it to be a big part of our self identity.

[metropolitan]

is there a book for cocky-funny guys that will teach them how to present themselves as nice guys? that's the one i need.

[TRock]

can you define what you mean as a nice guy?

[phersurf]

If your comming across as a nice guy, you're probably not being cocky and funny. You're probably only being funny.

If you already feel you have your inner game together, just getting on Davd D's mailing list may be enough. There are many great examples of people using it successfully, and better yet guys doing everything wrong.

And remember, you don't have to be an asshole or a jerk. You need to be a GOOD guy, not a NICE guy!

[T-BONE]

RJ - studied RJ for 2 years now. It works great and women come back for more. Difficult to use in noisy places. Best one-on-one in quiet places. Seemed really weird at first, but after the results, it's powerful stuff.

CF - just started using this stuff. Great for opening in nearly all locations. The cockiness needs to be balanced. Too much and you're arrogant, too little and you're "friends only". The better looking you are, the less cocky you should be.

DIRECT GAME - rarely use this, but I had a friend several years ago that used only this. He pissed off a lot of women, but he got laid alot. I realize now, he just lacked proper opening techniques.

CAVEMAN - great to use in loud clubs when you can't hold any type of discussion.

The most successful PU I know is my brother. He uses mysterious, funny, but not cocky, lots of sexual innuendo, ambiguity and plenty of caveman. He came by all this naturally, where as I've learned my skills by study. He opens very few sets (3 per night), but has probably a 99% number&kiss close and 70% fclose. He's not looking for LTR's, mostly just ONS's.

The RJ stuff create powerful bonds that help me maintain MLTR's.

My advice is study everything you can, decide what you want and use what is easiest for you.

[bjf]

RJ - studied RJ for 2 years now. It works great and women come back for more. Difficult to use in noisy places. Best one-on-one in quiet places. Seemed really weird at first, but after the results, it's powerful stuff.

CF - just started using this stuff. Great for opening in nearly all locations. The cockiness needs to be balanced. Too much and you're arrogant, too little and you're "friends only". The better looking you are, the less cocky you should be.

DIRECT GAME - rarely use this, but I had a friend several years ago that used only this. He pissed off a lot of women, but he got laid alot. I realize now, he just lacked proper opening techniques.

CAVEMAN - great to use in loud clubs when you can't hold any type of discussion.


What are each of those things?

[T-BONE]

bjf, glad you asked

RJ is Ross Jefferies' Speed Seduction also called NLP (neuro linguistic programming). A way of communicating to make women feel certain states. His theory is that people do things because of their state, not because of logical decisions and that through certain verbal and kino techniques, you can elicit those desirable states in her. The key is to link yourself to her good feelings. Make her feel safe, comfortable, then fascinated, then connected, then aroused.

CF is from David DeAngelo and others. This is Cocky & Funny and much easier to understand. This is my most successful way to open, but it requires a delicate balance. If you're only funny, she will want to hang out as friends. If you're too cocky, she'll not want you around because she thinks you're arrogant.

DIRECT GAME - I haven't studied much of this, but I think I use it in the late stages of pickup sometimes. It's about being upfront and honest about what you expect her to do sexually.

CAVEMAN - Women love to be touched (kino) and this method has worked for me without anything else when it's too noisy to hear each other or when you can't really run the other methods for some reason.

[alanrudy]

So if a guy does this stuff naturally and has successful relationships with women, that's OK. But if some guys need some assistance, they're playing childish games!



I just want to say that I was/am one of the one's in need of assistance and the whole fast seduction thing and pheromones have been helping me. I fit what people were talking about exactly, I was raised with the "treat her right" and the "just be yourself" and the "nice guy thing". I can say it hasn't worked for me and I'm 26 years old now. I haven't had the success with women that I've wanted and my relationships end up being where the girl has the control and I don't get treated how I want to be treated. My advice, especially to younger people, is to not be how I was with girls. It has gotten me nowhere with girls. The RJ, David DeAngelo and mystery method stuff can be complicating and I'm not completely sold on trying to do all those things, but just the points that phersurf make in this post about the way of thinking about girls can help. I'm getting better at it and hopefully learning stuff from fast seduction and making it complement my personality will get me where I want to be. For me, it is not about not being myself, it is trying to become better at just being myself and improving myself.

[Damos]

What it all comes down to is "be yourself" but be the Best "yourself" you can be.I will admit alot of the stuff in the seduction communtity is intended to trick women into conversation which can then lead to more.But....I also believe this stuff is invaluable to a person like myself and many others who have had limited/no success with women.

No one is born knowing how to drive a car, it is something we learn and with practice become experienced with.In todays world little boys are not taught how to become men.How to become attractive to women.Is it wrong to seek out this knowlege?

The bottom line is, read everything you can on seduction.Then heres the funny part, forget it all.Don't use it consciously.It will become natural in time.

And...please don't think negatively of those who endeavor to improve themselves.:nono:

[maxo-texas]

I added CF to my dealings with all the females in my life and now all of them seem more comfortable and more happy.

We get a *ton* of training from movies and songs that if we are *really* romantic the girls will love us (and the girls get the same training).

The problem is that when we really do it, it turns them off, or makes them feel "uncomfortable", or makes you seem creepy.

It's one thing to do something romantic or just plain nice in the context of a solid relationship where you normally treat her so she feels comfortable.

But- CF has even improved relationships that I've been in for 20 years. All I can guess is that they feel more relaxed- they know who is in charge.

[bronzie]

Dont know why this thread was brought up again to the front, but just my opinion, d'angelo and all those guys that preach seduction techniques are like vultures feeding on the insecurities of men who have very little or low confidence. I once heard a d'angelo recording out of curiosity, since so many of the forum members bring it up so often ( often wondered why there is a high incidence of low confidence and pheromone use? in some guys), the audience were laughing at his stupid and I mean very LAME jokes. This mans teaching would not pass in Australia, nor in Europe, women on these two continents are much too sharp for this rubbish. By the way, in the one recording I listened too, he contradicted himself quite a bit, I believe he would have been better suited to selling cars than preaching behavioural techniques to men. But thier will always be those men that feel weak and need guidence, unfortunatly they just choose the wrong source sometimes.

[Damos]

What source would you suggest?BTW David .D is not the only one involeved in the seduction community.Have you heard of Mystery, Style,Juggler or any of these people.YES this stuff works in America,England, Europe ,Australia,Japan ...you name it.It's SOCIAL DYNAMICS.the basics of being socially productive.Just because you want to believe it doesn't work won't stop it from working.We as humans have a basic mating ritual the same as any other animal.It's just more complicated and full of more BS.

Listening to one recording and casting judegement is just plain silly.What evidence do you have to support your argument?As I've said before .....please do not look down on those who endeavor to improve themselves.

[Gegogi]

Damos, this is a forum for discussion of pheromones and their use. If you want to beat a drum for Davie D, discuss religion or politics there are ample and far more appropriate places for such chatter. Go there and knock yourself out. I for one wished this thread had been deleted or locked long ago. It is not helpful nor does it advance our knowledge of pheromones one iota.

[Mtnjim]

Damos, this is a forum for discussion of pheromones and their use. If you want to beat a drum for Davie D, discuss religion or politics there are ample and far more appropriate places for such chatter. Go there and knock yourself out. I for one wished this thread had been deleted or locked long ago. It is not helpful nor does it advance our knowledge of pheromones one iota.

Uhm...Gegogi,

Not to agree or disagree about David D, but to quote the discription of this forum, ""None of the Above" An area for discussing topics that don't fit elsewhere.".:POKE::blink::blink:

[belgareth]

Gegogi was right at the time he posted. I saw his comment and agreed so moved it from pheromone discussion to here.

[Mtnjim]

Gegogi was right at the time he posted. I saw his comment and agreed so moved it from pheromone discussion to here.

OOPS! Missed that part. Sorry.:whip:

[belgareth]

My fault for not saying anything.

[koolking1]

"just my opinion, d'angelo and all those guys that preach seduction techniques are like vultures feeding on the insecurities of men who have very little or low confidence."

Gee whiz, what's wrong with selling a product that some segment of the population wants, no matter the reason. From what I've read, there's been a whole lot of guys who have been thankful to pay for this kind of information as it has improved their lives. And, I might add, for every success story there's also another happy non-paying customer: the woman who falls for the guy!!! Alas, there will always be people who will pay for these instructions, or pheromones, or expensive clothes, etc. who will get nowhere.. Some just can't be helped but that in no way should imply that they not at least try. At least they seem to be offering something tangible unlike other "special offers" out there.

I get the DeAngelo emails and used to read them through, sometimes to learn something, often just to laugh. My girlfriend Sue also used to read them and she told me: "well, I hate to say it, but he's right, that is what women want" I trust her expertise as a woman.

A good number of years ago I paid for a book that taught me how to fix computers, yes - I was insecure and had very little confidence in my ability to fix computers. Although I no longer do that kind of work, that book paid for itself many times over. What's wrong in paying for some knowledge?

[maxo-texas]

At the risk fo repeating myself-- these things say what actually works, vs the songs and movies that show you what doesn't work.

If you watch movies, you think you just need to keep pursuing her hard and you'll get her because she'll know you really love her. In reality, she's filing a restraining order for that type of behavior these days.

In fact, when practiced in real life, most "romantic" gestures are pretty creepy unless the lady already wants them.

Meanwhile, the deangelo stuff guys are just having fun with the ladies- not getting hung up on any particular one- and a certain percentage of them pan out and turn into more.

---

On a different note- a lot of you want "real relationships". My life is so complicated that I couldn't fit in a "real" relationship. I just want a few more sex appropriate people that enjoy some of the same activities that I do. For going out clubbing and flirting on a friday night, or for massage, or for many other more intimate things- that's going to be a lady.

And it won't be just *one* lady. That set's me up to be alone if she's not available or if we break up. I have a much better set up with 5 close ladies and (3 prospects currently) all of whom know I'm a bachelor type and polyamorous. They know generally about each other but gawd no, I wouldn't try to mix them all together at the same time.