Aristoteles is a member of the mASF forum. Acronyms used in this article can be looked up on the acronyms page. To get involved in discussions like this, you can join the mASF discussion forum at fastseduction.com/discussion.
Original discussion thread: http://www.fastseduction.com/discussion/fs?action=9&boardid=2&read=103143&fid=23
AGENDA: Present my thoughts, not as an argument for 'rightness' or validity, but in the interest that they will be open to the viewing of others, who perhaps can attack what is weak and make it strong. In that sense, I've nothing to defend here, only items for you to explore.
PU iss a social game, most often starts with a social vibe, not with the aloofness we are shown in movies or television.
Not a man in the spiritual sense. A man in the primal sense, firstly and foremost. A quick suggestion: you can find primal man in studying anthropology. The masculine form is robust, muscular and had an intended function in nature. It's a great starting point.
Attraction is already there and nonverbal seduction(credit 60 Years of Challenge). It exists between masculinity and feminity naturally. You must be masculine, must must must. You must communicate masculinity. Most things people say are, in terms of formal logic, nonsense. Language has so many inherent problems that there's a whole field of philosophy that studies it and it's meaning. Your best bet is communicating on the animal level, the non-verbal level. 60 said wonders about sexual tension. The ability to cope with tension says something. Allow me to make the following conclusion.
Strength lays in the heart of the idea that is masculinity.
Now a broad model of PU might look something like this:
Social vibe ---> Increasing tension -------> Sexual vibe -----> Isolation and sex
(Cred Ij? Posted his rocket model, similar but different?)
Things I know to be empirically true (aka "field tested"): women will respond to the sexual state (credit GW).Not having an abundance mentality can destroy you- when you honestly believe you can get other women, this tends to be apparent in your behaviors. There is nothing sexier to a woman about a man than the thought that he can have any woman he chooses. This was literally said to me verbatim, "Because you're tall you can have any woman you want, huh?" There was drool on the floor. It doesn't have to be rational, stop making it rational, just display behaviors that suggest this, even if the only other person who has ever touched your penis was your uncle.
Because the truth is you already have a selection of women. There is a 500lb chick out there in the world who is dying to bang you at this very moment! There is a crystal meth addicted toothless hooker who would throw you a freebie, handsome! There's that plain girl with small titties and a pancake ass who doesn't fit in with what her culture is telling her is beautiful... she would love your male attention. And yes, there's a perfect 10 out there somewhere, who's fucked in the head with huge self confidence issues and a rat nasty personality that would bone you if you told her that you thought she was smart.
Self confidence and self value come from how you see others (Credit Chopan). Please read original post by Chopan, truly exceptional. Ties to masculinity. And then a sudden epiphany...
Strength is the heart of masculinity. But strength is a choice. There is no reason to 'imitate the stature of an alpha' lol. Don't you see you shouldn't be taking acting lessons, that this your life and you should be growing yourself? That you are a man and should be growing toward perfect masculinity every day? Any man can be strong. Choose strong.
Touch is key. Humans hunger for it, yet it is so taboo? There are studies that show newborn babies die if they are not touched. I read that somewhere, if you know where lemme know and I'll cred the source. Research the sensory phenomenon of touch and see that it is indeed having an impact upon your cognition. Touch is also important nonverbal communication.
Huge, huge falter IMO: looking for the techniques, the skills. Negging, hoop theory, wtf (but respect to our roots)? IMO, better to look at what you must communicate and how you can communicate it. HINT: Masculinity and nonverbally.
And the conclusion I give you now. Many of you will not like it.
You see, we are building a man backwards. Born into cultures that feed us values, we are removed by civilization from primal man. We are reinforced values that are detrimental to our personal flourishing. Don't you understand? Making it past WBAFC requires re-appraisal of values ("Pre-marital sex is wrong." "There is ONE girl out there for me." etc). Clearing a need, hunger or want has brought you here. So man is being rebuilt. But these high concept ideas of fidelity, honesty, honor... do these count for anything? Perhaps. But wouldn't you agree that they come AFTER primal man, which is what we are rebuilding firstly?
The first considerations I have for pick-up are found in the following questions; why does one want women? and what does a man want from a woman? The answer seems exceedingly obvious, sex of course- we are biologically designed to crave it. That motive is forever in the background of us, driving us in certain ways but this is not so much an intended dialogue of psychology. So when the question is asked, "Why do I desire a woman?", is the answer the pure sex of it? Or perhaps the fact that we so strongly possess elements of masculinity, and the essence of masculinity so heavily craves its counterpoint in feminity for more than sex. It craves feminity in itself?
But of the banal ego, of the idea that possessing a woman or many women someone lends defintion to the person is as to build one's house upon shifting sand. Endeavors of the ego, in any capacity, lack an end because the ego is a cycle? To consume and fatten itself to a goal that is forever moving out of reach- Candide, for example, was not content to dig in his garden. The intensely wealthy man is not possessed to own just one fine house.
The depth of the ego cycle is fertile ground for intellectual investigation but of no further interest to me and so I move on.
To address the secondary question (though there is a fine argument that it is not distinct enough to be a question in itself), what does a man want from a woman? I want to pull this question into the specific. Here I think the individual forms his own idea, be it sex, a relationship, social access to more women. But recent meditations that I've been having are moving toward the idea of wanting nothing specific and what that could possibly mean? Less of an agenda, more of a mindset of seeing where the interaction naturally leads. For you see...
Pick-up and what we're doing here isn't just a skill. It becomes incorporated into a person. Perhaps it is to feed the ego cycle, or grow the self, or simply learn how to communicate to a specific audience. Maybe it's about pure hedonism, repeat action A get result B- though I'm not inclined to think that, not given the intricate posts I've read on here. A prevalent theme I keep stumbling upon is the presence of feminity because it enriches our lives, sates a need, or even teaches us to be better men.
What I hold to be true of pick up. My meditation owes immeasurable debt to several worthy posters, those being 60 Years of Challenge, Ijjjji, Regal and Chopan (who dared to pique my interest and approach value theory). Much of this post is simply an aggregate of bits, written by others, that I thought extremely ingenious, accompanied by my reflections on them. If I failed to credit properly, alert me and I will edit. Please accept my frame as that of the student, or of the mind in development.
First step is breaking through Disney values- you aren't expected to be openly romantic or even especially 'nice' to a woman. You are expected to be a man.
THE ESOTERIC
(Non-essential,intended for a specific temperment of reader, the thinking man who adores esoterica as much as practicality. Skip at your leisure.)
