Posts
I can immediately think of plenty of idiots who get laid regularly. Conversely, I can also think of tons of intelligent men who don't. Immediately, this objection can be brushed aside. People with lower intelligence pay less attention to social programming and conditioning, and social conditioning teaches men how to fail miserably with women. That's how the phrase "AFC" came about, the average man is frustrated, and the frustration is largely due to the fact that intellectually, many men can't understand why following all the advice and doing what they are supposed to do isn't bringing them the results they want.
However, there are more serious objections to this idea. For example, ever been to a science convention? Or a sci-fi convention? How about a Mensa meeting? All of those have tons of incredibly intelligent men, and everyone of those places looks like a gigantic cock farm. There is a skit with Triumph the Insult Comic where he goes to a convention and sees a woman. He says, "Holy hell, a woman here. You have your virtual pick of the lot. Ten thousand men, all of whom have no idea how to please you." If women are trying to pick up intelligent men, it would seem obvious they would hang out in places that have intelligent men. This observation bears no fruition, unfortunately.
Intelligence is something that only attracts women in a VERY specific way. You can't use intelligence as an axe to bludgeon women with; it works best like a scaple, only small, precision based applications will help you. There are numerous problems with using intelligence to DHV, let's see how we can help eliminate some of the bigger pitfalls of this.
1.) Any attempt to use intelligence means you are seeking approval: Mehow talks a bit about how to DHV using intelligence. A key distinction that he makes is the "evil clown" vs. the "dancing monkey." Like using intelligence, using humor to subcommunicate attractive qualities will fail miserably if you come off like you are seeking rapport with the women. Mehow's distinction lies in the fact that a good PUA will come off like he is having more fun telling the jokes and making fun of people in the group than the audience does watching him do it. The exact combination is called "Cocky/Funny" or CnF, pioneered by David DeAngelo.
2.) Using intelligence can indicate you are socially uncalibrated: Face it, where are you at when you use this? If you bring up your opinion on existential philosophy and the Dadaist movement while at a club, you come off as a pretty weird guy.
3.) Intelligence can make people feel intimidated: If you are more intelligent than the people you are talking to, they will feel too timid to say anything. No one wants to look foolish or ill-informed. By being intelligent, you make them self-conscious of saying or doing anything stupid, thus making it very difficult to vibe.
How to avoid these problems
The easiest way to avoid these problems and pitfalls is to use the following strategies:
1.) Indicate genuine interest in the other person's contribution: In one of Ben Franklin's many letters to himself, he has one about how not to make an ass of himself at a party. Essentially, he says to talk less and to indicate more interest in what the other person is saying. Given his intelligence probably exceeded that of yours, it's good advice. If someone makes a statement and you qualify it, they will feel more comfortable around you.
2.) Hedge your statements: If you make statements like, "The pig can have an orgasm for thirty minutes", it shows a couple of things. First, what the hell are you reading in your free time? Second, the statement is blatantly showing that you know something they don't. We'll revise this statement a couple of ways to make it more palatable. First, hedge the statement with something like, "I read something really weird today. I found out that pigs can have an orgasm for thirty minutes. But it didn't say if it was the male pig or the female pig. What do you think?"
You have added that you *read* this interesting factoid somewhere else, thus not making it seem as if it was universal knowledge. If you state facts without hedging the statement with stuff like, "I think I heard", "I might have seen somewhere", etc., you give direct statements that make it seem as if this is things everyone should know.
3.) Give some situational relevancy to what you say: The statement "I read something today that was really weird" adds some situational relevancy to what you are saying. This doesn't apply to just saying things that are intellectual, it applies to any statement where people might think you are bragging or bringing up irrelevant topics.
4.) Go somewhere with it: The final piece to that is to go somewhere with it. Why were you making that statement? In this case, the follow-up is whether or not it was the male pig or the female pig. If she says female pig, you can follow-up with, "What? That's so sexist. Even across species, women still band together." Or if it's male, "What? You know how many sandwiches you'd have to make me if I had a thirty minute orgasm?"
5.) Make sure it's information worth being shared: This one is the "who didn't know this?" part of the blog, but make sure the information is actually emotionally stimulating. If it wouldn't be included in a book like "Why do Men Have Nipples?" or "Uncle John's Bathroom Reader" it probably isn't worth sharing. Your ideas on what the best race car is probably won't titillate many women.
Overall, the structure looks like this:
1.) Situational Relevance: You have a reason for bringing it up so it does not come off like you are bragging.
2.) Emotional Relevance: The information is interesting or has enough value to warrant bringing it up.
3.) It has some follow-up: You need follow-up to vibe or to help qualify the woman.
No comments:
Post a Comment