| fast seduction 101 promotion section |
 If you haven’t already visited the
 ASF forum or Player
Guide web board, now would be a good time to do
so… Don’t forget to this site! Fast Seduction 101
now has a 
product review section. |
She likes “pacifiers”
5/22/01 6:34:56 PM Eastern Daylight Time
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
More free personals: http://www.watchmeswing.com/.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Tilt:
I've been into the whole SS thing for going on 3 years now and my results
have been, well, mediocre at best. It seems that SS offers some valuable
communication skills but right now I have a hard time believing that it will
get you pussy unless you have ideal circumstances (i.e.. quiet environment,
attention on you the whole time, no interruptions, environment conducive to
talking about DEEP topics, no competition in the proximity from guys who
match her ideal, etc.)
Ross's Comments:
Hmmm...well, if you walk into it being "tentative" then what you
are going to be conveying to HER? If your attitude going in is,
"please tell me this is ok with you" then you are giving HER the
power.
My metaphor is conductive mediums.
If I put 100 volts of electricity through a sheet of wood and a
sheet of gold foil, which is going to conduct electricity better?
Same current, same electrons, one medium burns up while the other conducts.
Your attitude and willingness to experiment are going to affect the results.
It also sounds to me, from your question, that you are WASTING TIME
IN CLUBS. Goddamnit, how many times do I gotta say it: Clubs are
the HARDEST place to make ANYTHING work. It's almost like being a
masochist.
Geezus......
Also, it sounds like you think SS is mainly or only about spouting
memorized, canned lines. GODDAMN IT. I have spent years trying to get
folks to see this:
THE PATTERNS ARE ONLY EXAMPLES.........
Tilt Continues:
I was contemplating going to the SS seminar in London in June but I have
reservations about spending what for me is a substantial amount of money on
something which doesn't appear to be working (even after learning and
applying
it in just about every conceivable situation - 3 different continents, women
of
various backgrounds, etc. in different settings using all sorts of
approaches).
I just wonder whether this stuff is designed for use in the LA coffee shop
scene (and therefore has its greatest applicability there). I've found that
the
times where this stuff has worked it's only been when the women obviously
found
me attractive beforehand and was "up for it" anyway, there wasn't too much
strong competition, and I used the SS language as a bridge into her pants.
Ross's Comment: You aren't applying the technology right.
Tilt Continues:
So my questions are :
1) What would I learn by going to the SS seminar that isn't covered on
Ross's materials? (I have all the major products and I've worked through
them all
AT LENGTH)
2) Has anyone else had to put up with ages of getting poor results (I've
probably got laid more in the last 3 years than I did in the previous 3 but
as a Hit Ratio - it's far less. I wonder whether the "major successes" that
some guys talk about are just a result of approaching ten times more women
rather
than being ten times "better") and then had a breakthrough? What did you do
differently?
3) (To Ross if he's reading this) Are you going to cover anything in the
seminar that's specific to the British mindset? (Conventional "walk-ups" go
down like a ton of bricks around here, so do themes like "energy," etc.,
most of
the SS stuff just sounds weird to them and anything deeper than "oi, having
a
good night?" or "did ya see the football?" won't get you a word in
edgeways).
Ross's Comments: I have heard this bullshit excuse from virtually EVERY
culture from excuse makers. "Oh, that will work on Boston girls, but out
here in Chicago, the women are all bitches" etc., etc., etc., etc., etc.
ALL WOMEN HAVE UNCONSCIOUS MINDS. ALL WOMEN HAVE UNCONSCIOUS NEEDS.
Full stop.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Dennis (Dr. Dennis W. Neder who wrote the book Being a Man in a Woman's
World. Visit the website at: www.remingtonpublications.com. Commenting on):
>I believe this observation to generally be correct but here is an
>interesting situation that I don't quite understand. I started dating an HB
>that has a 10 face, and an 8.5 body. I'm probably a solid 4 or 5. I'm self
>employed and work 70 hours a week and don't have a hell of a lot of extra
>time to spend with this girl. She is used to having her every needs catered
>to by her past boyfriends, and is constantly yelling at me for not spending
>time with her, or paying enough attention to her. I don't really put up
with
>a lot of the crap that her ex-boyfriends have put up with, and she says she
>doesn't freaken understand why she always feels like she is begging me for
>attention when there are guys constantly hitting on her. So far so good, at
>least I thought. I present challenges to her and treat her in a way that
she
>isn't used to, but now she is saying that she wants to date other people,
>and feels less attracted to me because of my behavior. Just out of
curiosity
>what is happening here?
>My Comment: She's getting smart. And you haven't framed the relationship
>in such a way that what time you have for her is what she can expect and
>should be happy with.
Believe me, women definitely want a challenge. She is "testing" you here (as
I describe in my book), and trying to get you to react to the *situation* -
don't do this!
Instead, tell her, that, if she wants to go out and eat hamburger, when
she's got steak at home - her choice. You don't care. If she's looking to be
with someone of value who is worthwhile, she better not screw her chances
with you up. You might want to add, "However, now that I know what the
ground rules are, I can start looking for someone that is worth MY
attention."
Then, be quiet - the rule is: WOMEN WANT TO DO THE CHASING - NOT THE OTHER
WAY AROUND!
>Eclypz:
>I just wanted to ask if you could request the attention of some people. I
>certainly wouldn't want to limit it to Ross, but specifically, I would love
>for him to read the essay about alpha males that was posted two newsletters
>back. It's a difficult read at times if only for the fact that the grammar
>is poor because of the translation.
>Here's the link one more time:
>http://www.geocities.com/athens/troy/1813/treatise.html
>I know it might be beating a dead horse, but I feel as if I have come to a
>point in my growth where understanding this biology would be very helpful
in
>building who I am. More specifically and to the point, I'm curious about
the
>genetic factors of primitiveness and cultured-ness.
>
>For instance, I was talking with a friend of mine named Crystal (no, really
>I was!) and she graduated with a degree in speech pathology. I guess they
deal
>with helping alot of social disorders that are present in people, such as
>those who have autism for instance.
>So I asked her, where is the line between ultimate change through therapy,
>hypnosis, psychology, changework, and then, on the other hand, genetic
>limitations?
>In a sense that comes back to the idea of being, "the man". I know the
>whole alpha thing has been discussed before, but it really hit me as being
very
>essential in understanding yourself, and knowing what to change and how to
>change.
>So, once again, a summary that begs to be answered. In your all's opinion,
>is the status of a male (alpha, omega....) a fixed genetic determinant, or
a
>learned role (I can't help but see a genetic influence to say the least).
In
>autism, we see a certain amount of growth and change, but nevertheless a
>person still retains the signs of autism. Many of them are able to move on
>and live on their own, but not without supervision.
>How about colorblindness? If you don't have the correct rods and cones in
>your eyes, you can't see certain colors distinctively. Can hypnosis change
>that? Then how about your role as a male? Did your mother and father pass
>on to you some gene that determined your stance in life?
>I could go on and on, but I want to keep it focused as much as I can. Let
>me know what you think...
Our "modern" society seems to forget that we're not 5,000 years old
("civilized" society based on recorded history) - we're 1.6 MILLION years
old! That means we've had all that time (fully 99.7% of the time we've been
here!) to evolve into what we are. Believe me, the "Alpha Male»" concept is
as valid today as it was a million years ago.
Thus, this is actually an "unlearned" role in this feminized society of the
past 35 years or so. So many men are really confused about their roles
today. Interestingly, of my readers, I get a lot of mail from women saying
that THEY have come to the conclusion that they want Alpha Males too!
Believe me, this is ingrained and evolved in us. Trying to reduce its
importance is to go against nature itself!
>Primoman:
>>If she has to win him he will be more likely to stick around. This is
>>another reason women test men. If a guy boots out right away he will not
>>stick around and help with the offspring. If he persists then he will
>>stick around and she then allows him to mate her. This makes me think of
>>the recent fractionation posts on the SS list. Fractionating her to build
the number of >>events that prove he will stick around.
>I don't think they test men because that proves they will stick around. I
>think they test men to see how powerful they are mentally. Women figure
>that men who are desirable won't fall on their knees for a woman just
>because of her looks.
>But this has nothing to do with whether he will stick around or not, that
is
>the woman's job to try and keep him!
I've got an entire chapter in my book devoted to "The Test" as given to men
by women. Women don't want men to solve the problem (the test), they want to
know how men will REACT to the test. Are they going to fumble around trying
to solve everything, or, are they (men) going to take charge, recognize the
test for what it is and tell her that she isn't going to introduce that crap
in their relationships?
Women want to see the latter!
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Joseph:
>In a sense that comes back to the idea of being, "the man". I know the
>whole
>alpha thing has been discussed before, but it really hit me as being very
>essential in understanding yourself, and knowing what to change and how to
>change.
>So, once again, a summary that begs to be answered. In your all's opinion,
>is the status of a male (alpha, omega....) a fixed genetic determinant, or
a
>learned role (I can't help but see a genetic influence to say the least).
Hehe - This is a tricky one...I once asked a Bible school teacher whether
God
knows who is going to Heaven. She said that He does, but that we still have
a choice.
This same truth can be applied here. Some people say that if you need SS or
Pheromones, then you aren't the Alpha Male», because Alpha Males were born
with an animal magnetism. I disagree. When do we know that someone is an
Alpha male»? When he's dead and they count his children.
If you are born frail and ugly, and you don't do anything about it (i.e. SS,
Pheromones, attaining fame, attaining riches, other seduction techniques,
etc.) then evolution is weeding you out. But if you refused to be the runt
and learned to bag babes, you are the Alpha Male». God knows....evolution
knows....but you still had a choice.
>SuzyLicorice:
>>SWINGGcat:
>>Last night I decided to go to Barnes & Noble to do a little sarging. I
>>spotted a beautiful brunet-long black hair, piercing black eyes, and a
body
>>to die for, e.g. the tight top under her jacket revealed her naturally
>>large breasts, and her short skirt revealed her beautiful long legs. So I
>>went
>>up to her and asked her for the time, then I asked her "What would you say
>>if
>>I were to ask you for some of your handwriting?"
>>HER: Sure, what do you want me to write?
>Typically beautiful women need more rapport building interactions before
>they will agree to give a handwriting sample. It is very hard to believe
>that you could walk up to this beauty as a complete stranger, ask the time,
>then ask for her handwriting.
How so? People do it all the time. It's the number one move after the
initial approach. Been working this for years. Some girls actually ask
people to do it after they watch them do it to a perfect stranger. If you're
afraid of having your handwriting analyzed by a stranger in a public place,
perhaps you have xenophobia. It's perfectly normal.
>In reality, she would become suspicious, maybe even defensive.
I think that you become defensive. I asked an 80 year old lady for the time
today and she gave it to me happily. If you think that everyone who asks you
the time is hitting on you, perhaps you have an ego problem.
>The only way a man could get away with this, soon in the
>conversation, is if he was a drop dead gorgeous model type man. Otherwise,
>one would have to spend some time developing rapport and intrigue. Women,
>especially the more beautiful they are, typically do not give in that easy.
>Also, when a man asks them for the time of day, they smell BS.
Only a drop dead gorgeous man? Aren't women more suspicious of attractive
men? After all, they naturally think that they have a chance, and since they
can have any woman, they can't possibly be looking for more than a quick
fuck, or are they?
>>ME: That's vague. Each and every one of us is learning about people
>>everyday, but it's not necessarily fulfilling.
>The reply is negative. Telling her that her answer is vague and it doesn't
>tell anything about her, is a total insult. Instead, be congruent, then
>probe deeper.
If you think that telling someone that an obviously vague answer is vague is
an insult, perhaps you're just insecure. I suspect that he said this very
curiously and in a not at all insulting manner.
>>So, if I were to ask you, what
>>sort of learning about people do you find fulfilling?
>>HER: Good question.
>You told her that her sort of learning is not necessarily fulfilling, but
>then you ask her what sort of learning is fulfilling, and she says "Good
>Question." That reply is hard to believe.
Why on Earth is it hard to believe? Most people don't get specific like
this. Most people are just talking to have their lips move and keep from
going silent. This question proves that he is genuinely interested.
>Again, you just slammed her. A
>typical response would be for her to become defensive and maybe entirely
cut
>off the conversation with an excuse like she has to go home to her cat.
Perhaps a week minded woman who can't live up to a conversational challenge
would. In this case Swingcat's mission is accomplished - she has been
successfully weeded out.
> When
>in conversation with women, the man has to make the woman feel good. Once
>those feelings are established, she will open up and become more engaging.
I have had conversations with women that were immediately engaging.
Sometimes they initiate it.
>>HER: When I write I can escape the ordinary responsibilities of life. It's
>>that place of "fantasy", that place where anything is possible. It is that
>>place where I can be "the real me."
>It sounds exactly like Ross' terminology about the 4 places in the mind.
>Doesn't it seem a little suspicious that this gorgeous drop dead babe would
>use Ross' terminology to a tee to describe her feelings?
No, because where do you think Ross got the terminology? Romance novels,
soap operas, Cosmo...men don't think like this.......this VAGUE way of
thinking - WOMEN DO!
Ross had to learn it from them and then mix it with NLP.
>It leads the reader
>to believe that this woman knows Speed Seduction». Is it possible that she
>took Ross' course too? If so, she has Ross' 4 places in the wrong order.
The
>place where anything is possible is beyond her real self.
>ME: Yeah, there has to be a bond. Have you ever just met someone and felt
>that bond?
>HER: Yeah, that emotional connection.
>Red flag alert. The "emotional connection" between two people statement.
>More Ross terminology. This woman is good, do you agree?
She is good at being a woman. I've heard women say emotional connection many
times. They even describe that feeling of connection by pointing to their
own solar plexus. Ross's shit works because the solar plexus really is where
you feel a connection. What other thing can we call it besides a connection?
How to describe it without using "Ross's" terminology?
>ME: The second value you gave in a relationship is someone who challenges
>your intellect. But I have a feeling you like someone who can challenge you
>in general.
>HER: Yeah, but I hate bullies; the type of guys that make me submit.
>"Bullies" and "submit." Ross terms. It is precarious that this particular
>woman knows how to exactly describe her preferences in men, using Ross'
>terminology.
>>At this point she becomes a little teary eyed.
>Going back to the latter point that rapport was not developed with this
>woman, it seems unlikely that this pattern would be able to conjure up deep
>emotional responses.
LOL - You would be surprised. I have a lady friend who cries in the middle
of her own conversations, out of the blue, just because she said a word that
anchored a particular emotion from her past.
>>ME: You can open your eyes...If I were to tell you that your pleasure goes
>>beyond the 1-10 scale, how good did that feel.
>>HER: Oh my God, that was so weird. You read my mind. I feel infinitely
>>pleasurable.
>She's laying it on kind of thick.
Women often do. Sometimes they take the bait so soon and give such bright
compliments that it fucks up my game - gets me nervous and bashful.
>ME: Cool
>HER: I know this is going to seem odd, but are you bisexual? I ask this
>because your voice is very soft and you also seem sexually adventurous.
"Sexually Adventurous." That is a Rick term, directly from his palm reading
pattern.
>ME: No From here I went into Ricky's stuff about the Yin and Yang, and how
>two dominant energies are not compatible together, yet two nurturing
energies
>are. I went on to tell her how bisexuality among women is natural.
>She gave you the perfect segue into Rick's Sexual Nurturing pattern, and
>then instantly she confessed all her bisexual secrets.
Yes - the typical and most likely response. Doesn't always happen I'm sure,
but probably most of the time. And I'm sure she has plenty more bisexual
secrets which she hasn't yet felt comfortable enough to share.
>>HER: It depends on the person, but generally speaking, I like kissing
girls
>>more. See, girls are more process orientated, while men are goal
>>orientated.
>This is classic Ross terminology. "Process" and "Goal." Did you ever stop
to
>think maybe she is seducing you? She uses all the words.
Oh - I see...you're saying that Ross has a monopoly on the English language.
Sorry - I wasn't aware that he did. I will remember this the next time I
want to talk about my goals or human processes.
>>After the fun was over we sat and talked in her car. She told me how she
>>thought I was really something and that she had never been with someone
>>like me.
>She is laying it on very thick, considering the fact you never built
>rapport.
Were you there to see how well he mirrored her? Do you think he included
every bit of fluff talk in his post? Have you heard of Tom Vizzini's Golden
Bubble?
>>We then talked about threesomes. She mentioned that she had been in a
>>few. I suggested that the next time we get together, we should pick up a
>>hot girl and have a threesome. She said that she was open to the idea, but
>>needed to know me a little better.
>She already told you she is bisexual, she already did you, what more does
>she need to know? By this time, she is already open to the idea.
She needs to know that a threesome isn't the only reason that he is pursuing
another meeting with her. She needs to know that he isn't desperate to have
one. Needs to know that he will pick a girl that's to her liking. That he
has done it before and knows how. That he won't leave her out and reject her
if he happens to be more attracted to the other girl.
>>So my question to Ross, Rick, or any
>>advanced brother, is how can I convince her, the next time we go out, to
>>pick up on some girl and take her home with us?
>It is obvious that she used classic SS to seduce you. Since she is to die
>for gorgeous, that means you are one incredibly handsome drop dead gorgeous
>man. Otherwise, she would not have put up with your insults and lack of
>rapport. The whole thing sounds like such a fantasy, or maybe it was.
If you were on the SS list, you would have seen quite a few posts from
beginner SSers who praise Swingcat for teaching the Pick-Up-Arts to
beginners by setting examples in real life scenarios.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Ross:
> >Eric (snipped):
> > Powerful men appeal to the subconscious programming of biology. Women
want
> > a man who can take care of them and protect them as well as their
> > offspring.
Geesus J. Mergatroid. Whenever I hear this socio-biological bullcrap being
spouted, I reach for my ear-muffs and my .45.
We don't need to resort to unproven and UNPROVABLE biological/evolutionary
postulates to get useful results with the tools we have.
Look here; it is empirically observable that HUMANS, male and female
BOTH, respond well to those who SEEM to be sure of themselves.
Humans hate uncertainty. They look to resolve or set aside their own
doubt and certainty. ANYONE who acts more certain will attract more
attention, admiration and obedience.
Further, HUMANS, male AND female, have an innate tendency to follow
the herd and OBEY authority. Look at the experiments of Stanley
Milgram. http://www.stanleymilgram.com
What we have when we read these over-arching theories about "women
want this or that" is a lazy way to escape the task of LOOKING AT
THE INDIVIDUAL PERSON IN FRONT OF YOU. It's an effort to get an
over-abiding certainty of being able to reflexively, without thought,
handle and attract ANY person with a blanket idea. IT IS S-T-U-P-I-D.
> > That is why the Jerks have a lot of success with women. Jerks do not
>put up with crap. Jerks don't take crap from women, so they pass the tests
>>that women give them. Jerks are seen as powerful, the opposite of a wimp
Actually a "jerk" is someone who is self-absorbed to the point of
negating the other person's desires, wishes, needs, etc. This, in
the eyes of an in-experienced woman, with NO self-definition and NO
self-assertion of her own, PASSES for "power". So she idiotically
convinces herself it is something worth being around until she gets
enough pain to teach her otherwise.
And we should be part of this sick dynamic because....uh....why?????????????
> > Guy. Nice Guys put up with women's crap. Women conclude if they put up
>with
> > their crap then how will the Nice Guy be able to protect her?
More rubbish; it just gets boring to be able to predict and
control the other person's every move. This is true for men, women,
and even dogs and cats. ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.
>This has to do
> > with our instincts for survival of the species. I believe that SS works
> > because it gives a woman strong responses. The SS'er must be a powerful
>guy
> > because he is able to give her powerful feelings.
So, she has all these great experiences and that allows her to
conclude the guy is powerful? And THEN her survival instinct is
triggered and THEN she breeds with him?
Ha ha ha ha ha ha. Geez...
> He has a powerful affect
> > on her. Remember in society the powerful men are the ones who know
>language.
> > They are the ones who make money, who get what they want.
Uh...then how can unemployed, broke "jerks" attract so many women?
Contradicts your earlier theory......
Hey...what if women were...gulp...COMPLEX HUMANS like you and me? With
MANY motivations and reasons to fuck? Including that they are horny
and want a good bang...or to prove their own worth to themselves...or
because....gulp...they love a guy? Or whatever? Why do we have to view
1/2 the world as socio-biological ROBOTS who only respond to a
stereotypical POWERFUL MAN?
This is laffable thinking designed to avoid the work of calibrating
to the individual woman right in front of you.
Now I am ALL for choice in behavior. ALL for breaking your own
fixed habits and patterns. But this stupidity is NO good substitute
at all. And STUPIDITY it is.
>I believe this observation to generally be correct but here is an
>interesting situation that I don't quite understand. I started dating an HB
>that has a 10 face, and an 8.5 body. I'm probably a solid 4 or 5. I'm self
>employed and work 70 hours a week and don't have a hell of a lot of extra
>time to spend with this girl. She is used to having her every needs catered
>to by her past boyfriends, and is constantly yelling at me for not spending
>time with her, or paying enough attention to her. I don't really put up
with
>a lot of the crap that her ex-boyfriends have put up with, and she says she
>doesn't freaken understand why she always feels like she is begging me for
>attention when there are guys constantly hitting on her. So far so good, at
>least I thought. I present challenges to her and treat her in a way that
she
>isn't used to, but now she is saying that she wants to date other people,
>and feels less attracted to me because of my behavior. Just out of
curiosity
>what is happening here?
She's a unique individual, NOT a generality. She was interested FOR
A WHILE, in the challenge of getting more of your attention, but the
rewards have worn thin and she wants more. Ooops...so much for the
biological theory that your POWERFUL MALE BEHAVIOR ****MUST****
trigger those irresistible desires to mate with you.
>My Comment: She's getting smart. And you haven't framed the relationship
>in such a way that what time you have for her is what she can expect and
>should be happy with.
Bingo.
>Eclypz:
>I just wanted to ask if you could request the attention of some people. I
>certainly wouldn't want to limit it to Ross, but specifically, I would love
>for him to read the essay about alpha males that was posted two newsletters
>back. It's a difficult read at times if only for the fact that the grammar
>is poor because of the translation.
>
>Here's the link one more time:
>http://www.geocities.com/athens/troy/1813/treatise.html
I think you know by now what I think of this crap. HUMANS, in
general, respect and respond well to confidence and perceived
authority.
>I know it might be beating a dead horse, but I feel as if I have come to a
>point in my growth where understanding this biology would be very helpful
in
>building who I am. More specifically and to the point, I'm curious about
the
>genetic factors of primitiveness and cultured-ness.
It's useless crap. Just watch the unique woman you are dealing with.
HER unique responses.
Geez...we think of ourselves as complex, with many motives, but 1/2
the world is nothing but a simple biological reflex mechanism,
pre-programmed to lubricate and hop on the fuckstick of the most
bossy, dominant and powerful male. Yawwwwwwwwn.
>In a sense that comes back to the idea of being, "the man". I know the
>whole
>alpha thing has been discussed before, but it really hit me as being very
>essential in understanding yourself, and knowing what to change and how to
>change.
I've talked at length with Major Mark about this. He coined the 'be
the man' idea and I know he CRINGES when he hears or sees ignorant
folk misunderstanding him.
Hey....a BIG part of "being the man" is having the understanding
that WOMEN are very complex, unique individuals. It's having the
understanding that behavior takes place in CONTEXT and that there are
CONSEQUENCES. And it's understanding HOW to understand a woman's
unique complexity to move her to something she might not have
considered. BEING THE MAN includes HAVING THE UNDERSTANDINGS AND
INTELLIGENCE to realize that women are more complex than these
bullshit "alpha male»" theories take into account and that ALL humans,
men and women, respond to authority and power.
Sigh...
>I don't think they test men because that proves they will stick around. I
>think they test
>men to see how powerful they are mentally. Women figure that men who are
>desirable won't fall on their knees for a woman just because of her looks.
>But this has nothing to do with whether he will stick around or not, that
is
>the woman's job to try and keep him!
Look here: HUMANS HAVE LOTS OF BEHAVIOR THAT IS ON 'AUTO-PILOT'. It is just
what they are USED to doing, in a certain context. It is no more a "test",
much of the time, than your leg is testing the doctor when he hits
your knee with that little rubber hammer....it's an AUTOMATIC
RESPONSE.
Example: if you, as a guy, have had years of a fearful flight
response when you see a beautiful woman, are you deliberately TESTING
her to see if she will show you compassion and talk to you first? Are
you TESTING her? Or is it just an AUTOMATIC RESPONSE on your part
that doesn't serve you or her?
Gosh...women couldn't possibly be as complex as we are..with
gosh...some of the same problems and auto-pilot mechanisms fucking up
THEIR LIVES TOO?
Hold that response separate, outside yourself, and ask how you can
best deal with it/turn it around/run with it/use it.
Some testing DOES take place...mostly out of uncertainty and
insecurity. If you are most flexible, YOU will have a shot at
disengaging HER 'auto-pilot' and programming in YOUR course that you want
HER to take.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Matt:
> SuzyLicorice:
> >ME: That's vague. Each and every one of us is learning about people
> >everyday, but it's not necessarily fulfilling.
>
> The reply is negative. Telling her that her answer is vague and it doesn't
> tell anything about her, is a total insult. Instead, be congruent, then
> probe deeper.
I disagree. If I said "I like learning about people," and the person I was
talking with said the above, I would agree, probably verbally agree and go
in and find a better answer. If I was being particularly feisty, I might
grin and say "yep, it sure is vague." I don't count for all people, but that
is certainly not an insult to point out an obvious truth.
> It sounds exactly like Ross' terminology about the 4 places in the mind.
> Doesn't it seem a little suspicious that this gorgeous drop dead babe
would
> use Ross' terminology to a tee to describe her feelings? It leads the
reader
> to believe that this woman knows Speed Seduction». Is it possible that she
> took Ross' course too? If so, she has Ross' 4 places in the wrong order.
The
> place where anything is possible is beyond her real self.
Ross got this terminology From Women. He learned it from them. Granted, it's
better to elicit and use the person's own language. But Ross's general
"canned" stuff is designed and tested to work with many women, because it
matches their world. So is it really a surprise when they use some of the
phrases or have some of the ideas themselves?
As for Swingcat's skills: He is curious and asks probing questions, she
verbally ratifies that she likes it and gives him progressively better
answers. Only at that point does he begin to work in some patterning, moving
her along into fantasy (using her word). He continues to use her words in
her handwriting. He shows himself to be an authority in her world -- he
suggests her bisexuality (and he's right). At this point, he clearly has
strong rapport. She's into it, responding well. After a long pattern that
really opens her up, she is responding very powerfully. Everything he does
from here on goes right in. He launches into the powerful feelings stuff.
She's practically in love with him now, feeling off-the-charts good and
totally open to him. Now there is no doubt that she would tell him she is
bisexual at this point, using his words ("sexually adventurous") rather than
making a new term for it.
So it turned out that this chick is bisexual, a writer, and into psychology.
Sounds like a good prospect! Perhaps you might include in your model of the
world some sexually adventurous, beautiful women who are open, friendly and
looking to meet people and enjoy sex. Maybe not everyone is walking around
with a bitch shield up.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Ged:
>Eclypz:
>I just wanted to ask if you could request the attention of some people. I
>certainly wouldn't want to limit it to Ross, but specifically, I would love
>for him to read the essay about alpha males that was posted two newsletters
>back.
My advice may bother you, but here it is. I hope you will take it seriously
because I have been at the point you describe and feel that I've effectively
steered past some roadblocks that you may not see. I will not pretend to be
a 'PUA Master' (as if there WERE such a thing) but only a good student. For
those who know what I mean, consider this a sharing of ideas... I do not
mean to be condescending.
You should be more direct. It is impossible to 'request' attention. Even
the supposed request, by its very nature, secures the attention of the
potential giver long enough to be considered. If you want attention, own
that want and ask for or state it. Otherwise you WILL secure the attention
of powerful people, but you will look inadequate when you do and so they
won't share anything GOOD with you. This is an attitude that you will NEED
to be successful in your chosen pursuit.
It seems that many like to mythologize Ross as some kind of 'Uber-Seducer'.
Why would such a thing be done? He openly admits that there are situations
in which he is NOT effective! This 'pretend' mythology that many seem to
instinctually create must make it very difficult to actually learn from what
he says. You shouldn't supplicate, even to Ross. He is, as are we all,
just another Joe. He happens to be one with some very cool things to say,
(Kudos to that!) but you needn't idealize him beyond what he is. NOW....
if you want to be GOOD.... read that paragraph again and consider that the
same could be said of ANY beautiful woman.
I don't think Ross would be the one to ask about being an alpha male»
considering that you are coming from a biological perspective. Animal
systems demonstrate dominance in very different ways than intellectual/human
systems. That's not to say that you can't be something like an alpha male»
within an intellectual/communicative context, but the behaviors are markedly
different. Since your emphasis is on biology, you may be better advised to
ask that question to people who exhibit more animalistic alpha-male traits
than Ross does. This is not meant as an insult as Ross himself admits that
there are environments (such as clubs) in which he has severe limitations.
A club follows a more biologically based pattern of alpha-male behavior than
perhaps a coffee shop does. Now, if you want to discuss the use of
clandestine language patterns, (which are maximally effective in VERY
DIFFERENT contexts) Ross may just be your man.
>I know it might be beating a dead horse.
beating is yourself. They are YOUR skills.
I think many of the problems that the 'PUA community' runs into come as a
result of taking an inefficient approach to learning a foreign skill.
Although a systems/dynamic perspective certainly CAN be useful in
understanding women, it really should not be undertaken until the individual
has a clear understanding of the elements of the system. (In this case, the
women you desire and the social situations in which you usually find
yourself.) The truth is that, although women are affected by a social
dynamic they are, above and beyond that, individuals. Trying to learn this
stuff top-down is like gaining a deep understanding of the nature of a river
and then claiming to know everything about the boat that sails a crossed it,
even though you've never even looked at it. I suppose there are those who
could bend the will of the river (or the context) to affect the boat (or the
woman) but such a level of power is VERY DISTANT if you are currently a
powerless person.
If you really feel POWERLESS with women, you need to recognize that what you
lack is POWER. It is not understanding, insight or clarity. Such things
will come to you AFTER you have achieved the power you lack, not before.
Women will share their lives with you AFTER you become an interesting person
or AFTER you hone your style or AFTER whatever other step you take to
increase your appeal. Until then, everything you learn will be theoretical
because there is no real-world achievement. I may go into this at a later
date but in the meantime try reading some Carlos Castaneda and consider what
it means to HUNT POWER within YOUR context.
So often newbies come to this community and try to learn what it is like to
be a grandmaster in regard to picking up women when, from a martial arts
perspective, they haven't even learned basic punches or kicks. Even if some
rudimentary skills are learned, there are still blocks, parries,
counterstrikes, falls, and take-downs that must be MASTERED. (I think we
ALL like the take-downs the best!) ; )
Worrying about the alpha-male dynamic, the social meme, the embedded
commands, the hypnotic trance words, or whatever else you usually attempt
may be getting in your way of say, avoiding a VERY SIMPLE obstacle that you
would see had you collected more power or ability along the way. Larger
questions are irrelevant to your current situation UNLESS you currently have
a satisfying level of success from which to explore new options. If you are
trying to learn these things because you feel that they will be your "magic
bullet»" then you will miss the point. What good is a magic bullet» if your
gun is flaccid and weak from dis-use?
Just be sure that in your attempts to improve, you can see the forest AND
the trees. The map is NOT the territory and it is the territory that you
venture into any time you try to SUCCEED WITH WOMEN, or with anything else.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
SWINGGcat:
>> SWINGGcat:
>>Last night I decided to go to Barnes & Noble to do a little sarging. I
>>spotted a beautiful brunet-long black hair, piercing black eyes, and a
body
>>to die for, e.g. the tight top under her jacket revealed her naturally
>>large breasts, and her short skirt revealed her beautiful long legs. So I
>>went up to her and asked her for the time, then I asked her "What would
you >>say if I were to ask you for some of your handwriting?"
>>HER: Sure, what do you want me to write?
>Typically beautiful women need more rapport building interactions before
>they will agree to give a handwriting sample. It is very hard to believe
>that you could walk up to this beauty as a complete stranger, ask the time,
>then ask for her handwriting. In reality, she would become suspicious,
maybe
>even defensive. The only way a man could get away with this, soon in the
>conversation, is if he was a drop dead gorgeous model type man. Otherwise,
>one would have to spend some time developing rapport and intrigue. Women,
>especially the more beautiful they are, typically do not give in that easy.
>Also, when a man asks them for the time of day, they smell BS.
Is this your own projection of how things work? I personally have walked up
to hundreds of beautiful women and asked them for some of their handwriting.
Does this always work? No, but most of the time it does. So in response to
you, women usually become suspicious and defensive when you think of
handwriting as some sort of trick or ploy that they might catch you doing.
With me, most women reply favorably because I project the attitude that it
is
totally normal for them to give me some of their writing. Try this, it
actually works. Furthermore, you say "the more beautiful a women is the less
likely it is for her to give in." This is a bad frame to have. All women
are
just women. If you think that beautiful women are more likely to be bitchy
with this type of approach, then you are being quite presumptuous. How dare
you assume that just because a women is beautiful she is going to respond to
you
in a bitchy way?
>>HER: cool, I am a psychology student.
>>ME: Do you enjoy studying psychology?
>> HER: I love it.
>> ME: what do you find most fulfilling about studying psychology?
>> HER: That I can learn about people
>>ME: That's vague. Each and every one of us is learning about people
>>everyday, but its not necessarily fulfilling. So, if I were to ask you,
what sort of learning about people do you find fulfilling?
>The reply is negative. Telling her that her answer is vague and it doesn't
>tell anything about her, is a total insult. Instead, be congruent, then
>probe deeper.
You need to read this more carefully. Let me clarify what is going on here.
First off, telling her that her answer is "vague" is not an insult. Instead,
it is both a challenge and a clarification. Firstly, it is a clarification
in that I truly did not know exactly what she meant by "learning about
people being the most fulfilling thing about studying psychology." If I
didn't ask her about this, then I would not be learning anything about her.
I would only be "pretending" to learn something about her. I could pretend
to understand her to appear congruent. Would this have been good
communication? I think not. Secondly, what I did worked because I was
challenging her intellect. As I found out, this was one of her core values.
If I would have said to her "Yes, I agree with you, I find learning about
others so fulfilling" I would have been supplicating. Why? Because I would
have
been lying in that I would have been agreeing with her without knowing what
she meant by "learning about others being fulfilling." Remember rapport
isn't two people agreeing on everything; it is two people understanding each
other. Get the difference? Agreeing with what an HB says about everything is
supplicating. Furthermore, the world would be a pretty boring place if we
all agreed on everything. Instead, I am getting to her core values which
will enable me to get rapport with her.
>>HER: Good question. I guess the kind of learning that I find most
>>fulfilling is the kind that allows me to learn about myself.
>>ME: I think that is so true. It is amazing what we can learn about
>>ourselves through other people. Some of the stuff we learn about people
>>is trivial while other stuff has a real impact on us. So if I were to ask
>>you..what sort of things do you find yourself valuing as being the most
>>important when it comes to learning about yourself through learning
>>about other people?
>>HER: Wow! Another really question. I guess it's when I can be with
>>someone who can "challenge" my intellect, yet "respects" the person I
>>am. If a guy isn't on my intellectual plain, I will step all over him.
>You told her that her sort of learning is not necessarily fulfilling, but
>then you ask her what sort of learning is fulfilling, and she says "Good
>Question." That reply is hard to believe. Again, you just slammed her. A
>typical response would be for her to become defensive and maybe entirely
cut
>off the conversation with an excuse like she has to go home to her cat.
When
>in conversation with women, the man has to make the woman feel good. Once
>those feelings are established, she will open up and become more engaging.
Read this part again. I am afraid you misread this. What I said was "what do
you find most fulfilling about psychology" and she said "that I can learn
about other people" and then I said "that's vague; what sort of learning
about other people do you find most fulfilling". So I am not telling her
that her sort of learning in not necessarily fulfilling; instead, I am
asking her what part (or sort) of learning about other people does she find
most fulfilling. Get it?
>>HER: When I write I can escape the ordinary responsibilities of life. It's
>>that place of "fantasy", that place where anything is possible. It is that
>>place where I can be "the real me."
>It sounds exactly like Ross' terminology about the 4 places in the mind.
>Doesn't it seem a little suspicious that this gorgeous drop dead babe would
>use Ross' terminology to a tee to describe her feelings? It leads the
reader
>to believe that this woman knows Speed Seduction». Is it possible that she
>took Ross' course too? If so, she has Ross' 4 places in the wrong order.
The
>place where anything is possible is beyond her real self.
Gee, I wonder where Ross got these descriptions from?! Could it be that he
got them from talking to real live women? The point is that women
naturally describe the world this way. SS is your doorway into the language
women already speak in the first place. Ross did not invent the "four
doorways", he discovered them.
>>ME: Yeah, there has to be a bond. Have you ever just met someone and felt
>>that bond?
>>HER: Yeah, that emotional connection.
>Red flag alert. The "emotional connection" between two people statement.
>More Ross terminology. This woman is good, do you agree?
I agree that she is a real woman. This is how real women speak to other
human beings when they are in rapport with them. Try it and you will see
that many times you do not even have to bring up connection themes. Why?
because
they will bring up the themes for you. All you have to do is let them
describe those feelings, anchor them, and then ramp them up later.
>>ME: The second value you gave in a relationship is someone who challenges
>>your intellect. But I have a feeling you like someone who can challenge
you
>>in general.
>>HER: Yeah, but I hate bullies; the type of guys that make me submit.
>"Bullies" and "submit." Ross terms. It is precarious that this particular
>woman knows how to exactly describe her preferences in men, using Ross'
>terminology.
Remember, Ross developed this terminology by studying real live women.
>>HER: I know this is going to seem odd, but are you bisexual? I ask this
>>because your voice is very soft and you also seem sexually adventurous.
>"Sexually Adventurous." That is a Rick term, directly from his palm reading
>pattern.
You need to go back a read my post over again. The reason why she
said to me that I seem sexually adventurous is because earlier in the sarge
I
told her that one of the reasons I thought she was bisexual was because she
had
a very "sexually adventurous" energy. When you are in rapport with someone
it is quite common for them to follow by using certain words and phrases
that you use. (BTW, you can find all this in post. I really suggest that you
reread it.)
>>Now from here I went into Ricky's stuff about the Yin and Yang, and how
>>two dominant energies are not compatible together, yet two nurturing
>>energies are. I went on to tell her how bisexuality among women is
natural.
>She gave you the perfect segue into Rick's Sexual Nurturing pattern, and
>then instantly she confessed all her bisexual secrets.
The real reason she asked me if I was bisexual is that she wanted to tell me
that she was bisexual. If I had told her that I was bisexual, then she would
have felt comfortable telling me. However, Ricky's stuff about the yin and
yang did the job of making her feel assured and comfortable with telling me
that she was bisexual without me having to say that I was bisexual.
>>HER: It depends on the person, but generally speaking, I like kissing
girls
>>more. See, girls are more process orientated, while men are goal
>>orientated.
>This is classic Ross terminology. "Process" and "Goal." Did you ever stop
to
>think maybe she is seducing you? She uses all the words.
Where do you think Rick got this from? This is how women naturally
think of sex. You really need to get out and meet some women.
>It is obvious that she used classic SS to seduce you. Since she is to die
>for gorgeous, that means you are one incredibly handsome drop dead gorgeous
>man. Otherwise, she would not have put up with your insults and lack of
>rapport. The whole thing sounds like such a fantasy, or maybe it was.
LMAO. You are gravely mistaken if you think I did not establish
rapport and that I was insulting her. It is interesting that several well
respected brothers emailed me privately about this post complimenting me on
how well I was able to establish deep rapport with her through value
elicitation. You are the only one that seems to think that I
insulted her and did not establish rapport. Maybe, you need to take a course
on rapport. Am I a good looking guy? Well, some girls think so. I think that
I am slightly above average. But I am no model. I know that most models
could not give women the gifts that I have the ability to give them.
Furthermore, your comments on my post divulged more about yourself than you
would probably like; that is, by you trying so hard to see the negative in
my post, you showed all of us that you really see the glass half empty, not
half full. I can tell from your comments that you have probably not had much
success with SS because your frame is messed up. You still see SS as
fantasy,
not reality. So remember, your fantasy is my reality.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Hypno Bill:
>Eric:
>I believe this observation to generally be correct but here is an
>interesting situation that I don't quite understand. I started dating an HB
>that has a 10 face, and an 8.5 body. I'm probably a solid 4 or 5. I'm self
>employed and work 70 hours a week and don't have a hell of a lot of extra
>time to spend with this girl. She is used to having her every needs catered
>to by her past boyfriends, and is constantly yelling at me for not spending
>time with her, or paying enough attention to her. I don't really put up
with
>a lot of the crap that her ex-boyfriends have put up with, and she says she
>doesn't freaken understand why she always feels like she is begging me for
>attention when there are guys constantly hitting on her. So far so good, at
>least I thought. I present challenges to her and treat her in a way that
she
>isn't used to, but now she is saying that she wants to date other people,
>and feels less attracted to me because of my behavior. Just out of
curiosity
>what is happening here?
>
>My Comment: She's getting smart. And you haven't framed the relationship
>in such a way that what time you have for her is what she can expect and
>should be happy with.
Have you elicited her values and are you fulfilling them?
>Eclypz:
>So, once again, a summary that begs to be answered. In your all's opinion,
>is the status of a male (alpha, omega....) a fixed genetic determinant, or
a
>learned role
I believe that it is a learned role. Just like the computer you are reading
this on. If it has a weak second rate word processor, there isn't much you
could do with it. However, if it has a powerful program with tons of
graphics
it can do a lot more. Same computer, different programming. Humans begin the
programming process about 3 months after conception.
Even standard psychology gives these traits definite birth order. Generally
the alpha is the first born.
>How about colorblindness? If you don't have the correct rods and cones in
>your eyes,
Unless there have been studies of color blind cadavers eyes to actually
prove this, the conclusion may be incorrect. The Structure of Magic tells of
an Indian tribe that has only three words for colors so in their experience
of the world they only see three colors. Remember that all senses except
smell are filtered by the brain. Therefore what you see is not reality,
only your interpretation.
>Did your mother and father pass on to you some gene that determined your
stance in life?
A lot of what was thought to be genetic is based upon the false premise that
human experience starts at birth. Those outside of hypnosis have no
understanding that human programming starts before birth. And back to genes
consider that even identical twins have different personalities. And they
have the exact same genes.
>Primoman:
>>If she has to win him he will be more likely to stick around. This is
>another reason >women test men. If a guy boots out right away he will not
>stick around and help
>>with the offspring. If he persists then he will stick around and she then
>allows him to >mate her. This makes me think of the recent fractionation
>posts on the SS list. >Fractionating her to build the number of events that
>prove he will stick around.
>
>I don't think they test men because that proves they will stick around. I
>think they test
>men to see how powerful they are mentally. Women figure that men who are
>desirable won't fall on their knees for a woman just because of her looks.
>But this has nothing to do with whether he will stick around or not, that
is
>the woman's job to try and keep him!
You missed the point, this is at the subconscious level. Women are not aware
of this biological programming guiding them in their choices. There are tons
of studies to prove this. It is animal instincts. And I wrote in my post
that even if she wants a one night stand and no children, this still guides
her decision.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
David J.:
Usually I go to this Thai restaurant every two weeks or
so and always see this great looking Thai (I assume) waitress. She
speaks broken English. She is always friendly, but then again, she
is in the service industry. Last time I was there I asked her
name - figures it was sooooo hard to understand and repeat - can't
really remember it now (my mistake on this one).
Oh yeah, this is not one-itis - I am currently banging a different
chick and working another on the side.
Anyway, I think I must have endeared myself somehow,
cuz tonight when I went in - I got a bigger than usual smile. When I
leave the restaurant, I usually kino her - grab her arm, touch
her shoulder when I am saying goodbye, etc. But otherwise, I find it
extremely hard to be convincing at kino when I am sitting at the table
and she is standing. Tonight I tried light conversation with her
and it FELL DEAD AS A DOORNAIL! She was managing a tremendous
feat of carrying alot of dishes after we ate, I just laughed and said
'you're going to carry all of those?!' - I must have either spoke too
fast or she didn't understand cuz it seemed to have little effect.
Another time she was talking in Thai to the other waitress and I
said 'Hey, no secrets!' in a funny way. A couple other attempts at
conversation did not go over well (in my mind). So....
How do the other PU experts in the Foreign Language
Field handle ESL girls? What should I have done? What is the next
move I should make on this one?
This is going to be a great breakthrough for me. It will
help alot in the sarging of other Asian chicks - sort of precedent
setting.
My Comment: I don't have much experience with Asian women, but I have been
talking to an Asian chick lately (got in touch with her through a sexually
oriented website and have not met her yet, but we've been talking on the
phone for about a month - I usually don't do that, but when I could meet she
couldn't and vice versa) and we kept and I noticed that her language is a
lot more child-like than I have been used to with western women. When it
got sexual, which it seemed to have to take its own pace to get to, she was
very again childlike in her expressions (eg. she told me that she loves to
suck cock by saying she likes "pacifiers.") It seems to me that you can
just take it abit slow and let your own masculinity carry you with them.
This seems to have worked quite well with this one for me so far, although,
like I said, I haven't met her yet.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
| cliff’s list advertisment section |
| Cliff’s Comment: For those of you who are
just reading about this for the first time, I decided a couple of emails ago to add links
to these emails. The idea would be to get enough money in to hire someone to take
over the administrative work (and also to buy things which would improve this list, such
as proper mailing list software) for this list. If you were going to buy the product
anyway, just use the link that appears below and you are helping to keep this list going
at no extra cost to anyone. NON SEDUCTION-RELATED:
RECOMMENDED:
NOT REVIEWED YET:
|
| cliff’s free plugs section |
Cliff’s Comment: The following are all
recommended but clicking on the links and buying from them doesn’t send any money back
here (it is also recommended that the sponsors of these sites consider setting this up —
from the little experience I have had since I started the commercial section a couple of
weeks ago, I think you are missing a lot of business by not doing this):
|
INFORMATION ABOUT THIS NEWSLETTER ARCHIVE:
This is an archive of a free e-mail list relating to seduction,
maintained by "Clifford". Your comments are requested, encouraged, and
greatly appreciated (note that comments from different people are separated by
IIIIIIII’s). If you know anyone who would like to be added to the list, or if you
would like to be removed from the list, send an e-mail asking to be added or removed to cli***f@cl***.com[ ? ]
and it will be done. If you would like to be added to the free joke list, just
ask. For those of you unfamiliar with the references to Speed Seduction»Â®, Clifford
highly recommends your visiting http://www.seduction.com/. For those interested in seeing
the previous e-mails that were sent out ("the archives"), they are available on
request to Clifford or, preferably, can be browsed and searched at the archive at http://www.fastseduction.com/cliff/.
By your accessing this archive, you understand that the information contained in within is an expression of opinions, and they should be used for personal entertainment purposes only. You are responsible for your own behavior, and none of anything you read herein is to be considered legal or personal advice. You also understand and agree that any products you may order as a result of your reading about them in this archive are produced and sold independently from us and that any complaints, disputes or other issues which you may have with the sponsors of these products are to be dealt with directly with said sponsors and we are not responsible in any way whatsoever for any issues which you may have with them. If you are not in agreement with any of this, please leave his site now.
DISCLAIMERS:
This newsletter and the newsletter archive in general is reproduced here
with Clifford’s permission. Visual enhancements and search features have been added
by the fastseduction.com webmaster to facilitate the reading and researching of the
content. The raw text as it appears here is exactly as it appeared in the original
e-mail newsletter. Products, services, or external web sites mentioned or linked to
in this archive does not denote endorsement of those items. The contents reprinted
here are the opinion of the original writer(s) and are not necessarily the opinion of, nor
endorsed by, the owner(s) or operator(s) of fastseduction.com. The archive
enhancements are generated automatically and there may be occasions where the visual cues
don’t correlate exactly with the textual context; most of the time, though, the
enhancements are pretty accurate. The archive is updated as regularly as possible,
whenever new newsletters are sent out.
