Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
The 'How to stay out the friend zone' articles I see on the internet.
They usually come in two flavors.
1) The sympathetic. "Yes women are flighty thoughtless creatures that love to be abused. Here's how to make them think you're an asshole."
2) The condescending. "It's your fault you're in the friend zone, not the woman's! It's because you acted like an accessory and not a man!"
They both will then go along the same lines of the right amount of aloofness, how your compliments shouldn't be too good, and try to condition you to be a good little alpha male. The second tend to annoy me slightly less as they don't fall into as much misogyny It's it's still there in both, because any advice to not being friendzoned presumes a crazy thing: that with the right attitude any woman is yours.
And that's bullshit. Granted, things like confidence and attitude can make a difference but automatically assuming things didn't go your way because you (or she) did something wrong is poor judgment and it leads to people falling for creepy crap like the pick-up artists and the idea that they'll never land someone unless they're a jock or whatnot. Sometimes she's just not into you and that's that and you have to deal.
See, I have gone from being friends with someone into being a relationship so I don't even think the 'friendzone' idea has much weight, but here's an idea that does.
Not all women want the same thing. Not all women want Tom Cruise, not all women want strong men, not all women want someone who makes six figures chiefly. Insisting there's a manner of acting that will ensure you get with the cute girl in your comparative lit class isn't just sexist, it's dangerously close to endorsing conformity.
Comments
reddit.com
/adv/...
..which strangely has become slightly saner with the influx of more normalfags.
Also, PUA is not a monolith and has a lighter side. See: http://www.feministcritics.org/blog/about/seduction-communitypickup-artists/
I find it odd that they need to specify the fact that there are specific "feminist" pickup techniques you can use. As if being a feminist is an "odd" thing that some people can partake in if they want. And fuck James Franco.
>The Game
Goddammit, I just lost.
Also, title should be parsed as "Feminist Elements in Pick-Up Techniques". Feminism is something you can partake in: it's essentially a box of ideas, some of which you may agree, some of which you won't agree with.
Hijo de puta...
/me gets the fuck out of IJBM
^^ Reading stuff you think is probably wrong is a good way of working out what you think is right. And a potential source of laughs.
why do people always assume that people are somehow utterly mad about things in the internet simply because they write more than two paragraphs
Okay, maybe I was seeing patterns where there were none. I still don't understand why someone needs to read more than a couple of these things.
Boredom makes you do the weirdest things
I guess that is why I'm here...
I'm here 'cause you guys are alright, I guess.
On-topic, I feel that the kind of stuff the OP is about is just misguided because it assumes that using manipulative psychological techniques to get women to sleep with you is a great way to start a lasting relationship. Any woman who worked out that you've been doing this would dump you so fast your head would spin.
However, as I'm single, perhaps I've just been wrong all along in this belief.
I often find the monicker 'psychological manipulation' a tad over-the-top for what is for the most part Autist's First Social Cues. That assumption that women are so easily manipulated is a tad misogynistic in it's own right.
PEOPLE are easy to manipulate. You find out what strings to pull and they easily dance to your tune.
Examples plox besides general misanthropy. Besides, if premise is that people are stupid, than most are also too stupid to be able to manipulate.
I've just checked my e-mail and the spam folder is again full of e-mails inviting me to join a club where I can meet married women who want to cheat on their husbands (see the thread I did on this a while back).
It's just struck me - well, at least that's one way of avoiding the "friend zone." :P
I remember reading a study along the lines of «women who are susceptible to PUA techniques are more likely to hold misogynistic views about other women». Which is...something.
Thump.
Welp, when it comes to manipulating people, the difficulty depends on the person or people in question, the context of the manipulation and the resources and influence at your disposal. Not all manipulations are born equal in effectiveness or moral position either.
For instance, in my early teens, I manipulated my younger brother. We'd always fight about dumb shit and I was sick of it. I knew tackling the problem head-on wasn't going to do anything. I also knew that, as much as we fought, he looked up to me and emulated my behaviour. So I began acting more generously and sympathetically towards him. It took months or years, I forget which, but he eventually and predictably emulated me and today we're more like best friends that happen to be siblings than anything else.
People can certainly be very easy to manipulate, but it's a question of what cost in time, effort or resources you're willing to pay. Like all skills, manpulation isn't as simple as some make it look. Manipulating is about the words you say the same way swordsmanship is about hitting someone with a sharp object. Broadly true, sure, but it leaves so much out. What if you told someone a secret, knowing full well they'd pass it on? That's got a shitload of potential right there, and that's not even about vocal tone or even the particular words, but social values.
Manipulation, whatever one's feelings on it morally, is very artful and completely wasted on trying to get someone to sleep with you. We all do it all the time, to some measure. We do it to illicit reactions, make our friends, family and lovers feel good, err someone we dislike towards frustration or distract from something we we're not comfortable discussing. Malk suggesting I read Demon Knights is a manipulation; he's appealing to my thematic preference.
If you want to manipulate someone, my first question would be "why?", and then, "how far are you willing to go?" Manipulation can be as innocent and good-natured as correcting a young sibling's behaviour or be as crude and deplorable as trying to find a surefire method of making a woman sleep with you. Shit can get pretty real when you're playing with someone's emotions and actions, and cruel manipulation can fuck someone up worse than a bludgeon to the head.
If there was one baseline rule, I guess it would be "provide what they want in exchange for what you want", which is really just makes manipulation emotional commerce.
In any case, if you want to get into someone's pants, the closest thing to a surefire way is to spend a lot of time meeting new people in a non-professional context, have a good sense of humour and present yourself nicely. I can't remember who taught me this method but I probably owe them something expensive.
^^Someone should read IJBM Updates.
^^^
http://i290.photobucket.com/albums/ll251/Vaamp/laughing-girls.jpg" alt="" width="480" height="368" />
Thump.
You could refuse to believe me, of course. If it makes you feel better.
I disagree with Hatter on a metric shitload of stuff, but I wouldn't call him dishonest.
Thump.