mASF post by "toecutter"
posted on: mASF forum: General Discussion newsgroup, July 7, 2003>By attempting to tap into the altered
>states of being when we are sexually
>aroused, describing its resulting effect
>of the GWMer and the GWMee and by taking
>you step-by-step through the process,
>there is no way that this method can be
>argued as simplistic.
What do you mean? "Get a hard on, and speak to her about what ever banalities
you like ... she will pick up on it" is not a simplistic method? Spare me! You
can use big words all you like, the method is simplistic.
>In any sphere of life where one person
>is trying to get something from another,
>a common state must be formed between
>the buyer and the seller. In sales, I
>must go into a demonstrative and
>personable state, fully aware that
>people buy people first and whatever
>they're selling next.
What are you talking about? A seller and a buyer are in completely different
states. They are playing roles. Think about when you are in a used car showroom
looking at a used car. THe buyer is being smooth and accomodating, the seller
is being sceptical and throwing out objections. There is no common state, and
the seller does not enter the buyers state. If that was the case, the only
sales advice you would ever need is "go into a ravid, red-hot buying state
where you will buy anything, then pick up the telephone and speak to your
potential customers about the weather." Start thinking, will you.
>
>Seduction/persuasion/sales is impossible
>without a shared state between the
>actors/interlocutors.
What a mouthful, and load of horse shit.
>
>GWM is a combination of state
>control/management and targeted kino.
>Essentially, GWM has taken the key
>elements out of every other persuasion
>method and recognised the true fact that
>85%+ of communication is non-verbal.
Substantiate this. His method says "Get horney, ask her about where she comes
from, and she will be throwing herself at you."
>
>MM, SS, and to a large extent DYD
>focuses on the linguistic side of the
>matter. These methods have their merits,
>but share the fact that they miss the
>fact that most sexual communication is
>done through eye contact, body language,
>etc.
What do you mean? All concentrate on kino. All concentrate on body language.
Gunwitch has nothing to offer that works in a game other than fools mate. What
am I supposed to say to all these fabricated "facts"?
>
>GWM teaches us to behave as if we are
>already the lover/sexual partner of the
>target, and within minutes, assuming
>there is an attraction there, the
>woman's demeanour visibly mirrors the
>GWMers. This is its genius.
This sounds like a sales speil. THere is no content in that to discuss.
>
>I have kclosed and fclosed HBs, Bs and 1
>UG with GWM. I took whatever opportunity
>was open to me at the time and used this
>method.
Fools mate. You spoke to these girls about the weather and still got laid. How
can you judge whether it was because you were concentrating on the sexual
state, or what would have happened if you had done a competent PU?
>
>Regardless of which seduction technique
>is used, the base attraction from the
>woman to the seducer has to exist.
>Common sense teaches us this, otherwise
>it would be possible to score with every
>woman we choose.
Exactly the mission. Approaching groups allows you to choose the woman. You do
not wait for the girl to play a fools mate strategy. He calls the girls "lone
wolves" but what he really means is "lame wilderbeast that seperate themselves
from their herd and make for easy pickings". You understand that is desperate?
You understand that you are hitting on the lame wilderbeast rather than the
tasty, healthy morsels in the middle. Sure, lame diseased wilderbeast will stop
you from starving, but I want filet mignon.
>
>I think it was Ross Jeffries who said
>that "you can not possibly know to which
>type of man a particular woman is
>attracted". Once there has been some
>attraction established, mASF presents a
>number of ways to take this forward.
>
>IME, GWM is the quickest, easiest and
>most natural way to do this.
Fools mate. For me the easiest are the standing 3 sets in a place where the
music is not overwhealmingly loud. That way I can demonstrate my confidence,
social ability, wit and personality to a GROUP of people while ignoring the
target. This is important because she does not feel the performance is for her.
I am not hitting on her directly, and she can just sit and be comfortable and
watch like a fish looking out through a bowl at the outside world (me) and
think about me in her own head, just watching. I am not intimidating her by
hitting on her, and just allowing her to regard me in my element first. But
that does not mean that I do not do all the others. The girls in 7 sets (harder
to hold the entire set together). THe girls with a single guy (often you find
out they are together, but if yuo do not ask you will never know). See for me
it is about choosing the girl first and then dealing with the situation in
which I find her. I do not wait for a fools mate (lame wilderbeast) situation
and then just take what ever is available.
Then because I can do 7 sets and work my best in 3 sets, I would never even
dream of doing a Gunwitch 'so how about this weather we are having' PU with a
girl alone. I am so much better than it. I don't get why you guys think his
shit is novel. It is the standard conversation that AFCs everywhere are having.
"Ahh! But the AFCs don't have hard on's in their trousers", you say, "that is
the key". You think I don't get sexually excited during certain times in a PU?
Shit, I always get excited when I am kissing her. You have to control your
sexual arousal so that you do not become excited by her beauty, and can
excecute a competent PU with all the right messages communicated. The FIRST
rule of the "Tao of Steve" is "Be without Desire". The advice is good. You want
to allow her to be comfortable first, then hold off long enough that SHE IS
CHASING YOU.
>
>>Humour: his ideas are
>>bullshit. A little story. I
>
>No where is it written that you can't
>use parts from other methods while using
>GWM - it is simply that you have to
>maintain state, tonality, kino, body
>language and eye contact.
C'mon, there is a whole section on why not to be funny! Is the Gunwitch method
simply "Get hard on, speak about what she does for a living"? You are stripping
everything out of it, and leaving it as nothing but a single mission statement.
How can a single statement be a method?
>
>GWM has the potential to take the
>persuer and the persued into deep
>rapport very early.
It also has the potential to get guys becoming creepy stalkers. Look,
non-sexual approach is a KEY. Maintaining yourself as a challenge is a key.
Humour is KEY. When the girl goes "I could have this sexy, powerful older man,
I think ... lets see, I am going to try something", you have to stay just out
of her reach. Because the minute she realises that you want to fuck her she can
be like "See, I am charming, I am attractive to these real men. Aren't I like
Brittany Spears. He wasn't anything special. I bet he wanted me from the first
time he looked at me, just like little Freddie from my college class with
pimples on his face and semen stains on his jeans who keeps looking at my tits.
Look at the effect I have on men." Game over, girl has no more need to speak to
you, she knows you want her. She will go off to prove herself pretty to someone
who is a bit of a bigger challenge.
>
>>Palm-reading, ESP tests and
>>other gimmicks: He to weak to
>Whatever floats your boat. I will
>personally not do palm-reading,
>astrology, etc, as it would feel FALSE.
Okay, that is fine. Gunwitch has a whole discussion on how these things are bad
and will ensure you do not get laid. What the fuck does he know? He is
stripping the complexity and fun out of the game and saying "She will pick up
the vibes of my sexual state". It is simplistic and would be a huge regression
for anybody who can already PU with good game.
>>Repeating her name all the
>>time is dime-store, "armchair
>>psycology" Dale Carnegie
>>advice.
>
>I have always repeated the person's
>name, in business or in pleasure, and it
>works very well. It has been commented
>on many times.
Man, Dale Carnegie is lame. Good for the 1950's. We are over it. Look, she
doesn't know your name, and you don't know hers. At the beginning she doesn't
care, and once you are kissing her, it seems a little weird to be exchaning
names. You know what I mean? It is like "We probably exchanged names, but I
can't remember hers." But in fact you never exchanged names. With Strippers I
like to make up a fake name for myself. Like I don't ask her for her real one,
because we are in Stripper fantasy land. Like she says her name is Angelique,
and I say "OK, I'll call you Angelique and you can call me Inkelbert." Now lets
forget about the reality of our hum-drum existances and explore each others
fantasies and belief systems. The beauty of using bullshit names is not lost on
her. She loves it. Names are not important. It is not the sweetest sound in the
universe as Dale Carnegie says. If a girl remembers my name, I take it as an
IOI, and take a step back to get her chasing. Using her name is you giving HER
an IOI. You do not want to come across as if you are chasing her. YOu need to
step back and give her room to fall (in love with you) and get HER CHASING YOU.
>>Georgeous 9.5
>>
>
>GWM is a method for "lone wolves". Group
>theory is not discussed. What's your
>problem?
That groups is WHERE IT IS AT! Gunwitch, not only has nothing to offer but "Get
a hard on and ask her what neighbourhood she lives in" but then tells us that
we can only do it when girls get drunk and loose their friends, sitting out the
front as if they want to vomit. Yeah, that is quality stuff, man! The quality
girls are in groups, not the lame ducks.
>
>You are, of course, entitled to your
>opinion, but this seems to be as much an
>attack against gunny as against his
>method. This is disappointing.
Mate, it an attack at the guy who is claiming to the world that this is the
be-all-and-end-all of seduction skills when he has worked out "fools mate". It
aint new, and it aint difficult. Why all the bullshit surrounding it?
>GWM is an invaluable skillset to use
Why the marketing spiel with no specifics or arguements, just claims?
>
>In common with many others who have
>slagged GWM off, I doubt you have
>bothered to learn what it is really
>saying to you, let alone field-test it.
>People have called GWM "aggressive" -
>far from it.
What do you mean? You think I have never been horney when speaking to a chick?
I am telling you I have better ways, and they are articulated in my first post.
>Imagine, in your mind, a sexy woman.
>What is it about her which makes her
>sexy? Is it the way she reads palms, or
>runs patterns, or busts your balls?
For a woman, YES!
> No,
>it is the way her hair drapes over her
>shoulders, the way she looks in your
>eyes, the way she touches you, the way
>she moves her hips when she walks, the
>way her lips move when she talks, and so
>on.
Men are aroused visually. That is why we have porn. Women are attracted by
charachter, that is why they have fantasy novels with a couple of sentances
devoted to the guys appearance and hundreds of pages devoted to disecting his
charachter. They love romantic comedies starring Billy Christal and Paul
Reiser. It is not a visual thing for them.
>
>Cut the crap of society for a moment -
>our judgement on someone else whom we've
>just met is nearly always based on
>non-verbal criteria.
Yeah like social proof, wardrobe, hairstyle and choice of venue.
> SS, DYD, etc are
>mainly *verbal* methods - completely
>missing the process of initial sexual
>attraction.
What the fuck are you talking about with your marketing essay? SS does not
concentrate on attraction? Cocky and Funny is not about attracting her? Stop
this unsubstantiated marketing peice and actually discuss it. Gunwitch is a
method where you get horny, act serious and ask her personal banal questions.
You are better off going in with a non-sexual approach, acting humorous and
fun, negging and ignoring the target (or busting her balls), and talking about
stimulating fun conversations. Gunwitch method is boring and no good. Am I
realistically the first person to say these things? If no-one else has, it is
because they are scared of the group. People are definately thinking it. It is
OBVIOUS.
GWM teaches you to act like
>a man whom a woman would find sexy - the
>key to any successful seduction is to
>present your sexuality first and your
>personality second.
What a marketing piece. A confident guy who walks into a group and is the
centre of attention, moving through the world with ease and is attractive to
all the women. Getting a boner and hanging around supermarkets is not what
women find sexy. There are better ways. Presenting your sexuality does not
require that you are actually physically ready for intercourse right now.
|
