Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

If you need to use the internet to "pick up" girls, you probably don't have the confidence to chat them up anyway. I'm what you'd call a "chauvenist" but I have the confidence to pull it off, without some website telling me how.

Monster Rain wrote:

sebster wrote:My issue is with the baggage that goes with the PUA community. All the misgyny that surrounds their reasons means that things much worse than silly hats and emotional manipulation become inevitable.

They're repugnant human beings, so there's no argument here.

Im going to play devils advocate here like, I mean, I met a bloke on the piss in Hollywood once and he told me that he was a PUA for a living, it was the first time I ever heard the term, cos you Yanks are always a few years in front of us.

Anyway, I had a good 4 or 5 pints with him, he told me about that Tucker Max bloke and some other ones, and after a few internet reads I learned something about the "trade".

Basically, I think the blokes are boring fethers, and I was more popular with the chicks in the place we were drinking, he just told loads of lame stories about how good he was at picking up chicks, no funny ones, and its all about the craic when Im on the piss. If your not making me laugh im not that bothered about talking to you.

But in their defense, I mean, I am happily with my missus and I dont feth other women, but I can understand the appeal of the lifestyle. When I was a young thruster in the RM i used to go on leave for ten weeks, buy a round the world ticket, and then spend the next ten weeks drinking and shagging. I wasn't serial with it, cos I like an easy life more than I like ass.. So I used to always pull a bird I liked and then give up after that! A couple weeks in Australia with a South Korean lass called Jen, a few weeks in New Zealand with a bird called Claire I met on the plane.. gak like that.

I certainly wouldn't say that a single man who enjoys putting it about a big as a scumbag, and even fethers like that guy I met or that Tucker Max bloke cant be described as "disgusting human beings" surely?

I mean, I would call them boring bastards... but not repugnant. If you want to spend all of your free time chasing women, your a bit of a sad one dimensional bastard, but I don't think they deserve the gak they have gotten in this thread.

Being a PUA doesn't mean the person is successful or interesting, just that they have a terrible attitude toward women. There is also difference between between someone who cavorts with a lot of different people and a PUA. They aren't just fun guys who like to meet women. It has to do with their attitude toward woman that makes them problematic.

It's not like finding women that actually enjoy sex is horribly difficult. I guess if you want to focus on the hunting aspect that's different, but you don't really need to know secrets to get laid.

mattyrm wrote:
Anyway, I had a good 4 or 5 pints with him, he told me about that Tucker Max bloke and some other ones, and after a few internet reads I learned something about the "trade".

I'm pretty confident that Tucker Max is more bark than bite. I, ostensibly, have lived a fairly similar life in terms of being connected, and generally well off (same city as well). And while there are parallels in terms of stupid girls at upscale bars trying to find wealthy husbands, its nowhere near as extreme as he portrays.

Of course, it may simply be that he long ago beat me in the bastard contest, but I can't accept that.

mattyrm wrote:
So I used to always pull a bird I liked and then give up after that! A couple weeks in Australia with a South Korean lass called Jen, a few weeks in New Zealand with a bird called Claire I met on the plane.. gak like that.

Now you've gone and reminded me of Australian surfer girls.

You monster.

dogma wrote:

mattyrm wrote:
Anyway, I had a good 4 or 5 pints with him, he told me about that Tucker Max bloke and some other ones, and after a few internet reads I learned something about the "trade".

I'm pretty confident that Tucker Max is more bark than bite. I, ostensibly, have lived a fairly similar life in terms of being connected, and generally well off (same city as well). And while there are parallels in terms of stupid girls at upscale bars trying to find wealthy husbands, its nowhere near as extreme as he portrays.

Of course, it may simply be that he long ago beat me in the bastard contest, but I can't accept that.

Of course yeah, I don't believe half of the gak on anyone's blog, or in anyone's book. Never let the truth get in the way of a good story..

My point was simply that a bloke who is unmarried has every right to spend all his time shagging if he wants to, he is boring and one dimensional, but as as long as he isn't raping people thats his business surely?! I think that if a woman is dumb enough to let a bloke she has only known for 3 hours feth her, then despite the fact he told her he was a philanthropic playboy with a Bentley, she should have been less of a trusting idiot.

Men tell lies to get laid, this is no great revelation surely?! Women love shoes and don't like men who smell like socks. If I'm smart enough to know those facts, then women should learn something about the smelly cavemen that are always trying to get into their knickers as well!

mattyrm wrote:I think that if a woman is dumb enough to let a bloke she has only known for 3 hours feth her, then despite the fact he told her he was a philanthropic playboy with a Bentley, she should have been less of a trusting idiot.

My experience is that the decent women who get "taken in" by that stuff were really just trying to get laid in the first place, the rest are just social climbers who aren't much better than pick up artists.

A lot of people believe what they want to believe.

mattyrm wrote: I mean, I would call them boring bastards... but not repugnant. If you want to spend all of your free time chasing women, your a bit of a sad one dimensional bastard, but I don't think they deserve the gak they have gotten in this thread.

Hey, if some guy wants to try and sleep with as many women as possible good luck to him. Thing is, though, if a guy is halfway decent looking and willing to put himself out there and meet people he'll have plenty of success in picking up girls.

But that's not what the PUA community does. Instead they invent stupid games, almost all justified by the assumption that a woman is a puzzle that you have to trick into having sex with you.

sebster wrote:

mattyrm wrote: I mean, I would call them boring bastards... but not repugnant. If you want to spend all of your free time chasing women, your a bit of a sad one dimensional bastard, but I don't think they deserve the gak they have gotten in this thread.

Hey, if some guy wants to try and sleep with as many women as possible good luck to him. Thing is, though, if a guy is halfway decent looking and willing to put himself out there and meet people he'll have plenty of success in picking up girls.

But that's not what the PUA community does. Instead they invent stupid games, almost all justified by the assumption that a woman is a puzzle that you have to trick into having sex with you.

Wait women aren't puzzles?

Of course not. They're an enigma wrapped within a quiz but hidden within a secret language.

Hazardous Harry wrote:Of course not. They're an enigma wrapped within a quiz but hidden within a secret language.

Whats really awesome - by the time you figure them out the hormones change again and its back to square one.