Page 1 of 1

On the Genealogy of Deception

Posted: Sat May 25, 2019 11:49 pm
by icycalm

And how many things become immediately clear once we adopt this simple definition! For example the neg, the trick that launched pick-up: can anyone think of a more devious deception than this? To pretend you are not interested in precisely the person you are most interested in; to ignore her. Even worse: to search for faults and insecurities in her, or to even invent some, if you can't find any, and to attack them in the subtlest way possible so that the attack will not be recognized as such and the poor girl will be forced to misjudge her own value, and as a consequence become vulnerable to the PUA's advances; will ideally even be tricked into making herself an advance on the PUA: we are talking about a truly devilish level of deception here. No greater deception than this will ever be devised, and it's easy to see now why it's precisely this trick and this theory that launched pick-up, and turned it into a science. A science precisely because Mystery arrived at it by observation and experiment: the observation that the entire game of naturals hinged around feigning indifference. Mystery's first rule of pick-up thus became: to never approach the girl directly, but to approach her group and befriend everyone except the target. This is already a major neg, a neg which all naturals unconsciously employ; but precisely because Mystery was not a natural but a scientist—which is to say a supernatural—he carried much much further than any natural ever had with the whole business of actively attacking, and even inventing, faults and insecurities. Never mind that no one besides Mystery could properly play this trick for a very long time: the trick nevertheless obviously worked and still works today whenever Krauser and the London daygame crowd employ a "push-pull" tactic. For what is the push if not a mild (and therefore relatively easy to perform) neg? You are pretending to lose interest in the girl for a moment, or you tease the girl—these are negs any way you cut it. The strongest trick in Krauser's and the London daygame scene's game is still Mystery's neg, even if only a watered-down version of it, and even if they themselves don't quite realize it. Jeremy Soul meanwhile says "I never neg", and therefore gets worse results for his efforts—but if you can't neg properly it's better to not neg at all, and anyway such a level of deception is beyond the comfort zone of most people, and would moreover certainly clash with Soul's "suave British gentleman" game; which—since Soul has indeed managed to turn himself from an introverted nerd into a suave British gentleman through years of constant self-improvement effort—is not quite game at all, is game only in the most tenuous sense of the word.

And isn't the choice of word itself, when all is said and done, a dead ringer for what's happening here? "He gamed the system", we say. What does that mean? Does it mean that "He worked on himself until he improved himself so much, by the system's own rules and criteria, that the system declared him the winner?" Or does it rather mean that he went above and beyond the system until he subverted its rules and criteria for his own ends?

How differently do we watch now, once we have finally a proper definition in our hands and have understood exactly what's going on, Nick Savoy's and Ross Jeffries' little spat on Dr. Phil, with both sides fighting over whose game is less deceptive! (look for the episode on YouTube, it's hilarious). Nick Savoy, Mystery's successor as president of Love Systems and thus champion-in-chief of negging, is fighting the guy who advocates hypnotising girls as an honest means of getting to sleep with them! The only thing lacking from the show was a proper mind-control guy so that the other two sides could gang up on him—precisely because this guy would have had the best game ever! But it is here as elsewhere, as Nietzsche has noted: "When unconscious deception would work better than the conscious kind, deception becomes unconscious. In the other case, when one has extreme clear-sightedness one needs the genius of the actor and tremendous training in self-control if one is to achieve victory." And since none of these guys is a genius actor, otherwise they'd be winning Oscars and wouldn't need game to get laid, they've all bought into their own lies to such an extent that the gross deceptiveness of the techniques they themselves devised became at last invisible to them, and even a rank idiot like Dr. Phil can see it and school them on it as if they were complete retards. All the way to their graves all these guys will go swearing up and down that they are honest, while the London daygame pricks flood YouTube with utterly moronic videos lecturing us about how innocent and heartfelt their methods are. Yet every single one of them lies like a ruffian when the subject of what they do for a living comes up with a girl, since they know the truth would instantly kill any interaction. Even the mere approach is deception, and if you disagree with this try the experiment of telling the girl that she is the tenth you approached that day, ot the hundredth that month, or the thousandth that year, and see how many of them you land from the on.

All text game is deception too, since the number one rule there is not to text when you want to text, nor what you would like to text, but to text specific types of messages at prespecified intervals—and, generally speaking, to text as little as possible and as slowly as possible—all of which is of course a type of neg again, since it's meant to create the impression that you are a busy man and that the girl is not very important to you because she has very little value compared to you and your other affairs. Even GLL's ultra-minimalist text game contains a seed of deception, since his periodic mass spamming of "sup sexxxy" is not exactly an honest move, and if he came clean with what he's doing only the sluttiest of girls would still go for him, and at any rate a great deal fewer than now. And of course GLL spam-approaches too like everyone else and lies about what he does for a living, so we see that even the most hardcore self-improvement advocate's game is still based on a core, however small, of deception, and is unthinkable without it.

As for what pure honesty in pick-up would look like... I guess the Apocalypse Opener, which is not game at all precisely because it is 100% honest, consisting as it does of you going up to the girl and asking her if she wants to go home with you tonight. The Apocalypse Opener is basically a civilized version of caveman game, which also isn't game since once again there's no deception involved there either. The more attractive you are (=self-improvement, which isn't game) and the better you've chosen your target (=observational insight, which once more isn't game, it's common sense and experience in dealing with people) the better these two approaches will work for you, with no need, or even room, for deception. The requirements are the same in both cases: heaps of desire and raw attraction. This desire could be due to the attraction being too strong (usually the male motive) or because the people involved are too lonely and/or horny (usually the female motive), while the differences between them as regards the skillset required to pull them off are, in caveman game's case, the fearlessness to lay hands on the girl almost immediately and without waiting for any sign of consent from her—which is the closest to rape game that conventional clown game ever gets (look for the distinction between rape and clown game in an upcoming chapter)—; and in the Apocalypse Opener the steel nerves to verbalize immediately precisely what you are thinking of and then to sit there and calmly wait for her answer. Fearlessness then is the common ingredient in "pure honesty game" and what changes is the form in which it is manifested: physically in caveman game—just a hair's breadth away from violently—; and verbally in the Apocalypse Opener: i.e. in a civilized manner. The problem with these two approaches—i.e. with complete honesty—is that, even if you have the looks and balls to try them, they are too inefficient and, on the rare instances when they work, net you inferior girls anyway: generally slutty ones, and not even the hottest sluts. Girls are simply not biologically wired for perfect directness and honesty, for obvious evolutionary reasons (because they are the weaker sex, and as La Rochefoucauld has noted, "a weakling is incapable of sincerity"), and I wouldn't have it any other way—no real man would. Because wanna know what happens when directness and honesty rule the day in sexual relations? Gay game is what happens—homosexual dude game—fag game, in plain English. The loss of all subtlety and an atmosphere of pure promiscuity in which any notion of romance dies. And if you think that cold approach kills romance too, that's true to an extent, but nowhere near the extent of the sheer obviousness and even vulgarity that reign supreme in fag circles, which consist of dudes hitting on each other thereby leaving no room for subtlety, deception and romance (just as happens in arranged marriages, which are again agreed upon entirely between dudes). So any girls you manage to get with caveman game or the AO will tend to be 1) on the slutty side, temperamentally, meaning good at most for a few bangs but not for a relationship, and 2) not the hottest girls around, because the hottest girls arounds can get sex with hot guys whenever they want without having to wait around for random strangers to offer it to them. Occasionally, you might bump into a truly hot but depressed girl, or a truly chaste but depressed girl—or, if you grind out huge numbers, a hot and chaste and depressed girl—and land her through caveman game or the AO—but that applies to every kind of game and is a result of the game of games: the numbers game and pure statistical anomaly, not a virtue of being honest and a reward to you for swearing off subtlety and deception (and what is subtlety but a form of deception, at the end of the day? A minor form of it, ultimately.) On top of that, if you look carefully at how caveman game and the AO work, you'll realize that they are very ineffiecent which means that it's much harder to do huge volume with them—and thus play the numbers game properly—than with with any other type of game besides social circle game (social circle game being the least efficient type of game, bar none). I am referring to the fact that caveman game and the AO work strictly in night venues, and then only towards the end of the night. You can try them in broad daylight if you want, and good luck with that, and you can certainly try them earlier in the night, but your success ratios will just tumble, and become even more pitiful than is normal for these types of approaches. So while in daygame you can hit on 50 girls a day if you want, with "pure honesty" game you'll be lucky if you can do a couple. The best case scenario would be working the nightlife district of a major city, where you can access a dozen or more night venues back-to-back, with them ideally right next to each other and with no cover charge. In that case you can wait until a couple of hours before closing time and then enter each venue in turn, hitting on one girl per venue and then moving on to the next. You could conceivably hit on a dozen girls per busy night that way (i.e. probably not on Sundays or average weekdays), but even that is doubtful, at least with the AO, since even when the AO succeeds, it doesn't usually succeed immediately; i.e. the girl doesn't typically jump into your arms and scream "Yes! Take me home with you! I've been waiting for you all night!" You'll have to have at least a little chat while she makes up her mind, and becomes convinced you are not a serial killer or something, and she'll have friends she might need to chaperone and deal with, all the while she could change her mind at any moment and leave you holding your dick in your hand while having wasted half your night. It's just not very clear when you've landed a girl with the AO, since as long as she keeps talking to you there's no way to know that you have failed for sure and make the call to move on. Escalation is also a no-no with the AO, so you have no test beyond your intuition, and if you allow girls a set time, say ten minutes, to take off with you before you split you will be losing even many of the very few that would be biting in the first place. And all that's on top of the amount of time you'll need to spend to spot possible targets per venue (which can be significant, since you'll be generally looking for lone girls or girls separated from their friends for this type of approach to have a decent chance of succeeding). Overall, caveman game is significantly more efficient than the AO, just as GLL's aggressive screening cold approach is significantly more efficient than regular cold approaches, and for the same reason: the quick physical escalation which screens out timewasters immediately, but by the same token also the more demure, chaster girls that require just a little bit more in the way of wooing—so it lowers quality overall, even as it raises efficiency. But both these figures are abysmal compared to what's possible with more conventional approaches, so the only way I can see these extremely honest types of approaches being incorporated fully beneficially into someone's game is on the last approach of the night, to cap off a full night (or even a full day) of gaming. Do them as a novelty approach, for the sheer fun of it and to mix things up occasionally and stretch to the max your capacity for what GLL calls "social freedom" exactly as weight-lifters try one-rep-maximum attempts every now and then to gauge the extent of their strength gains. If you can deliver an AO or do caveman game at will there's no such thing as approach anxiety for you, and regular cold approach will seem tame and even boring in comparison, which is precisely the attitude towards it you will need to have to take full advantage of it and excel at it. Otherwise the only thing you will achieve with full-time AOs and caveman game is low quality girls in an inefficient manner. That's what honesty gets you, I am afraid. So much for the PUAs who pretend to champion it, then.

What I've been trying to demonstrate to you for the last few pages, ultimately, is that deception is the fil rouge that runs right through all types of game, and therefore forms the essence of game around which all analysis should be structured. Otherwise there'd be nothing to say about it, since the Apocalypse Opener can be explained in about a page, and so can caveman game. Two pages then would be the extent of our PUA literature, if we wanted to exclude deception, which would amount to killing game. Take my own game, for example. As I write this, I am soon to celebrate my 41st birthday but the girls I usually end up with are around 20, and my ideal target is a teenager, and the younger the better—and moreover a Western teenager, not some poor Eastern European chick or a Southeast Asian one. So if I went around telling these chicks my real age I'd be shooting myself in the foot almost every interaction, and no amount of bullshitty naive advice of the "just be yourself" variety can change that. I am being myself when I interact with these girls, and what myself is telling me to do under the circumstances is "Lie"—which is all the more easier and comes more naturally to me since they themselves tend to assume I am in my mid-20s, which is a result of good genetics and a great lifestyle. Base value then (=genetics) and "self-improvement" (=the great lifestyle) are not the antithesis to deception but the very basis on which to build a good lie, and sell it. The better you are as a man the more options you'll have in attracting girls and dating them, which options should include lies for those who wish to maximize their gaming potential. If there was some way I could pass for a 16-year-old and get a chance to bang virginal 14- and 15-year-olds again you bet your ass I would try it, but as things stand I cannot and my chances with that age group are minimal (which doesn't stop me from trying every now and then, by the way, since the numbers game is the numbers game, amen). GLL has a hilarious video up on YouTube where he demonstrates what not to do when playing rich-guy game. He dresses up in a suit and stops a girl in the mall with absurd offers to fly her via private jet to Vegas on the same day, while acting like a complete braggart prick throughout; and though his goal is to get blown out, for the purposes of the demonstration, you can see the girl staying in the interaction for ages and giving him chance after chance to dial down the bullshit and redeem himself. She is obviously attracted to him because he is a good-looking guy, and she is probably also attracted by his pretended wealth, both of which qualities—the genuine good looks and the fake wealth— are a result of good genetics and constant self-improvement. Because the only reason a mere blogger like GLL can sell himself as a private-jet-owning rich guy are the thousands of cold approaches he has done and countless PUA gambits he's tried, which demolished his approach anxiety and developed his capacity for bullshitting convincingly all day long if he likes. Exercising your "social freedom"—which for beginning players is pretty much all of game—is almost like taking an acting class, and that accords well with the views of all the great thinkers on social life as fundamentally fake—as ultimately based on a certain degree of deception. If you determined to be 100% truthful at all times you would soon find yourself without a single friend, and isn't all of society itself—our great modern, globalised, democratic society: the greatest society the world has ever known—based on the greatest lie of all, the lie of equality? In fact most of what passes itself for "game" consists of instructions for autistic nerds on how to tell precisely those little lies on which social life is built and which the rest of us instinctively employ. Asking a date back to your place for a "nightcap", for example, or "to watch a movie"—what PUA would advocate truthfulness under such circumstances? And what PUA literature isn't Socialization 101 is advice for troglodytes on how to appear human. Nick Savoy's admonition in Magic Bullets, for example, to "keep your place clean" and your bathroom "hygienic", and to "zap nose hairs and unibrows" because "girl notice". I mean really? But it shows you what kind of people this literature is aimed at, who must be told in their 20s and 30s to take up a sport or read a book and leave their room now and then, and not even for the joy inherent to athletics or reading or going out, but merely as a means to finally getting laid. And what's left after you've removed elementary socialization advice and how to lead a decent life from PUA literature? Big lies, and how to get good at selling them.