User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 277
Joined: Sat May 25, 2019 11:06 pm

What Women Want

Sat Feb 08, 2020 2:58 am


Now that the number one theoretical issue of pick-up has been solved (i.e. the definition of game as deception, as analyzed in my monumental multi-part essay Defining Game), it's time to turn our attention to solving the number two issue, and the number three, and the number four and five. All these issues are deeply interconnected, so it's not possible to solve one without at the same time solving all the others, and that's why none of them have been solved yet. And don't bother looking elsewhere for these solutions. Time and again the PUAs have proved themselves incapable of dealing with them, and one after the other they have abandoned them in a torrent of botched and often laughable analyses that aren't worth mentioning. Moreover, they have all quit the field and today they aren't even around to engage with these issues at all. Mystery has long stopped writing. GLL finished his series of articles and got married (to a 6 as well, by the way) and is now selling drugs, along with Cernovich and Victor Pride. Roosh went back to his low-IQ Middle Eastern fanatic roots and is praying to his gods to forgive him (and give him virgins, I guess), while the fearful London weirdoes have scrubbed the internet from any traces of themselves, and the RSD toons have turned to lifestyle coaching. The only one left around is, indeed, Krauser, and all he's been doing is recycling increasingly overwritten versions of the same little daygame model he learned from Yad and co. ten years ago. He can't even figure out that biological success requires actual babies to be born (he thinks Darwin meant notches), so there's no way such a dumbass could even grasp the QUESTIONS involved, let alone provide the answers.

And here, without further ado, are the biggest questions left in pick-up, all of which will have been completely and definitively solved by the end of this and the next couple of essays:

1. Why does cold approach give at most 5-10% success rate regardless of how good or good-looking you are?

2. Why does social circle seem to give the "best" girls?

3. What's superior, cold approach or social circle, and why?

4. How important precisely are looks for pick-up?

At the heart of all these issues is female psychology: what exactly women want from men. It's pretty incredible that after all these years and all those countless blogs and forum posts and badly-written ebooks, the PUAs still don't have the faintest clue of what that is. Even the super-perceptive GLL finally concluded that the only thing that matters is looks—which is what his concept of "attraction threshold" signifies, which Krauser and Roosh promptly plagiarized in their latest books (plagiarized, not copied: copying is good, plagiarism is rebranding the concept and pretending you invented it). And this is where we are left today: every "sexually available" girl (another GLL concept Krauser and Roosh plagiarized) has a certain "attraction threshold", and your job, as a PUA, is to increase your looks to the point where you are above it, then approach the girl, and voila: she's yours! (And of course this almost never works, which is what the 5-10% success rate of the best PUAs signifies: near-complete and total failure.)

It's a very masculine understanding of things, isn't? Very simple, very straightforward, like an algorithm of attraction. As if girls were robots, in other words, and the machinations of their desires could be figured out with an equation! This is what GLL bequeathed us, and this is what Krauser and Roosh plagiarized.

And yet, the questions above still remain. GLL's theory solves none of them. Take number 1, for example. Does the 5-10% success ceiling in the street mean that only 5-10% of girls in the street are "sexually available" at any given moment? I would say the number is closer to 50%. I have met tons of "available and looking" girls in the street who declined to sleep with me, or even to give me their number at all. Now you might say that perhaps I failed to clear their "attraction threshold", but A) I am very good-looking by any measure, even better-looking than GLL whose entire shtick is that he's good-looking, and B) Of the available girls who give me their number and I fail to bang—and there are lots of those—I often tend to see them on Facebook later with new guys who are way uglier than me (most people are uglier than you if you're good-looking). You might say "maybe your game is lacking dude", but according to GLL's theory there is no such thing as game and the only thing that matters is the girl's availability and your clearing of her attraction threshold. And in any case, if GLL and I lack game, there are certainly others who have great game. Do THEY get more than 5-10% in the street? Whoever your game heroes might be, they too are reporting 5-10% maximum in the street, so there must be something INTRINSIC to the street that gives such a low success ceiling. That thing is precisely what women want, and because it is IMPOSSIBLE to give it to them in the street, no matter how good-looking you may be, or how much game you may have, that's why the success ratio in the street is so abysmal.

Let's switch gears for a moment and attack the problem from another angle. And this angle is the social circle. My success rate in social circles is something absurd like 80%, which is to say that, in any social circle of which I am part, almost all the girls will be into me and interested in sleeping with me and being my girlfriend. This number sometimes rises to 100%, especially if I've already banged one of the girls and she's been talking to all her friends about me. Now you might find this hard to believe, and all the PUA gurus would say that I am lying because they are all lame and have no idea what it's like to be the coolest guy around, but that is your problem and the PUAs', not mine. The stuff I am talking about is the REALITY of the coolest guys in any social circle, and the reason the PUAs have never heard of it is because they are too lame to even HAVE social circles, let alone be at the top of their hierarchies. In my specific case, it's not merely that I am the top guy in my own social circles, I am the top guy in ANY social circle I am introduced to, sometimes within mere minutes of the introduction. How can this be, you ask? Well, it would take quite a while to explain this, and if you're genuinely interested in this subject you'll have to wait for my autobiography which will go into detail on what makes me so special. But for the purposes of the current analysis, it would help to give some indication of the kind of person I am so that the reader might perhaps begin to form an idea of my reality, which is after all the reality that led to the solution of all these PUA issues that you're interested in understanding. You can't really understand my solutions if you don't at least make an effort to understand my reality, so let's take for example my university years, when I was at the peak of my social circle game. Let's say we're at a party, and someone introduces you to me. The first things you notice about me are that I am the tallest and best-looking guy in the room; also, the coolest-dressed, with the best fashion sense by far (which is street-skate-sports-etc.) And so you ask me what I am studying. "Aerospace engineering", I reply—while nearly everyone else in the room including you are studying something lame like business or sociology. Then you ask where I am from. "Greece", I say—and you note that my English is nevertheless better than yours. "How did you get here?" On my Ducati 916 Italian superbike that's one of only two bikes to be considered for museum exhibitions (and the other I am buying next year). "What are you doing for the holidays?" I'll be in the French alps snowboarding. "What were you doing last night?" I was betting 5000 pounds sterling on red in a casino—and won. "What are you doing tomorrow?" I have a full contact kickboxing fight so I won't be drinking much and will be going to bed early. "What's that thick textbook on your coffee table?" It's called Terraforming: Engineering Planetary Environments, and no, it's not for school, I bought it on my own because I read a lot. And on and on it goes. That's without even counting what THE GIRLS of the circle will know about me, which is that I am hung like a porn star, and can fuck for six hours straight. I hope you get the picture by now? Maybe you think the picture is fiction, but as I said that's your problem not mine. My problem is solving all the grand PUA questions I listed earlier, and my massive success in social circles was the key that helped me figure everything out. THIS is why I solved all these issues and the PUAs failed to solve them, because of my experience at the top of social circles, which they lack, so that the 5-10% success ratio in the street seems great to them, because before pick-up their ratio was 0% lol, so they don't even see a problem here. For me, on the other hand, the problem has always loomed gigantic and incredible. Why does my success ratio plummet from 80% to 5-10% the moment I step out of my circles and into the street? I am the exact same guy in both scenarios, so why are those basic bitches in the street—even the 6s and 7s which I would never in a million years pay attention to in my social circles—rejecting me left and right here? All these bitches would be giggling behind my back and talking in hushed tones to their friends about me, inviting me to all their events and fishing my friends for info to find if I am available and which of them I prefer. And in the street they often look at me and treat me as if I am a homeless person lol! It doesn't make any fucking sense!

And yet it makes perfect sense if you understand what women want, which I never did until now. In my university days I thought the girls liked me because of my looks, but the truth is that the girls liked me... because the guys liked me. And the guys liked me, not because I am good-looking lol—they weren't gay—but because I was the most interesting person among them. The guys liked me because I was studying aerospace engineering, because I fought in kickboxing fights and went snowboarding and surfing, because I rode Italian superbikes, and gambled entire fortunes, and could drop out of school for days and weeks to play role-playing games and videogames, and then show up at school on exams day and ace all my exams. No matter what cool thing you were into, if you were a guy, I would be into that thing too, and far more into it than you were, and super-passionate about it, so we could talk about it and do it together and have tons of fun. And, of course, such a person is extremely valuable in any social circle—if that person is willing to BOTHER with social circles at all, that is, which I never did quite simply because I was always too busy with my various interests and activities to have the time for them. And yet... the people around me kept inviting me out, and now and then I would accept their invitations, either as a change from my routines, as relaxation, or quite simply in order to meet girls. And, of course, this distance that I always kept from social circles was merely another part of my allure to the circles in general, and to the girls in them in particular. Let the PUAs think that the top guy in a circle is the "organizer" guy lol, the guy who calls everyone up and books the tickets or makes the reservations... that's such hogwash lol. Usually, this is the job THE WOMEN do, or some busybody extroverted semi-effeminate dude who doesn't have much going on in his life and who lives for the mindless chatter of the coffee shop or the "thrill" of "hanging out", and can't spend a single moment alone with his thoughts in his room quite simply because he HAS no thoughts, and thus can't stand solitude because he can't stand himself. I repeat that I was always the top guy in every circle I ran with, and yet do not remember A SINGLE time where I determined what bar or club or even restaurant the group would go to. I would simply be invited by my roommate to come out with his circle, or by someone in my class, or by someone in the gym, or by my current girlfriend, and I would often decline, but sometimes I would go, and all the arrangements would have been made long before I was even invited, and I would go wherever they had arranged to go, and do whatever they had arranged to do—shoot pool, eat sushi, watch a movie, play paintball, party all night—and I would note the sly, embarrassed looks all the girls would give me, especially the single girls (and the taken ones when no one was watching), and sooner or later the hottest of them who were the most self-confident would make a pass at me somehow, and I would pick the prettiest one and bang her and, if I still liked her after that, would take her for my girlfriend. In short, I would have precisely the passive, chooser role that PUAs say women have. Not a single time did I hit on a girl in any of the social circles I ran with. That's not how naturals act. Naturals like me do not pay any attention to girls at all, especially the ones we like the most, it's an instinct we have from when we are small boys running around the playground or the beach in large groups of kids and having no idea what we're doing or why we are doing it. It's all instinct, and I have been this way since birth, and I've been kissing girls in playgrounds since I was 3 or 4 years old, taking down their panties behind the house since I was 9 or 10 and having no idea what to do with them. The hottest girlfriend I had in college came up to me so drunk she could barely walk, took me by the hand, and led me to her room, before we had even spoken three sentences between us. THAT'S the reality of the top guys in every social circle, and it has nothing to do with looks or wealth or professional success, or any other factor that guys care about, but one: status, the only thing that women really care about and are viscerally attracted to, and the one thing that it's impossible to convey in the street.


Return to “Endgame: The End of PUA Theory”