Month: January 2024

Reported for.. talking to girls at the gym?
byu/Steve77307 inPickUpArtist

In case this gets deleted

This is the original post

I was at the gym today in the squat rack, and the manager came up to me briefly. I Can’t remember exactly what he said, but it was about how I was talking to some people and it made them feel uncomfortable. I asked him what I said, who was it, and/or what day it occurred, but he wouldn’t disclose anything else than that, other than they were women. Regardless, he expressed how it wasn’t a big deal and left.

I am at a bit of a loss as to what to make of it. Yes I have been trying to talk to some girls at the gym, but I have not been explicit about it or flirty in any way. I made sure to approach them during appropriate times, such as when they are resting between sets or when they are on their phone. I never tried asking for their number or social media accounts. I was playing “the long game” so to speak. I have only spoke to these women once except for one, and all of the interactions appeared to have been pleasant, and under 5 minutes. I have done everything I could not to come off as creepy or to seem like I am “hitting on” them, Yet I still getting reported too the staff.

I can’t really learn much from it.. except to be even MORE worried about what you say and do. Maybe I am doing something I am not realizing that is putting them off. Regardless, it is a sad state of affair’s when men have to be soo perfect when approaching women.

I’m critical of guys that approach at gym or at work, in general.

But his follow up comment

I have done pickup before and have tried some things that might be considered riskier. Such as “number closing” some office girls at work (I got written up a few times) and I was banned at one gym about 4 years ago for doing explicit pickup when I was breaking into the game.

What I was doing here though is tame in comparison.

There’s a problem here deeper than technique and social dynamics.

I just don’t know exactly what it is.

Part 1 – we addressed the paper tiger issue.

If you’re a fan of RSD, Tyler, Owen, Natural Game, and low key Milton Erickson, Bandler and Grinder, and Tony Robbins (MESSAGE!) – A lot of the rest of the video (now taken down as of 1/2/24)…..but I have the transcript.

Tyler – I’m going to be talking about a lot of very wacky and bizarre off-the-wall concepts… for women this dumb gold jacket is worth a lot more than say a diamond bracelet or a Rolex watch ….I’m going to explain to you also why being an idiot … is actually more powerful than being what most people these days would call a high value guy.

This is both an obvious concept to vets, and a weird concept to noobs.

To echo what I said yesterday, the things that men want/that society rewards aren’t the same things that women want and reward.

Indeed, what a lot of us have found, is that the things that men look down on/society punishes – women want and reward.

This is the classic Roissy post where some area gets hit by a massive flood.  The camera shows men dutifully working to salvage and rebuild…and then some jackass comes through the flood on a jet ski.

There’s a ton of Black Pill stuff along these lines, but all of the rule breaking, bad-boy, d-boy, criminal, actual serial killers.

Let’s focus on the transcript.

the things that men think women like are not necessarily the things that women actually respond to

Tyler mentions wearing a gold jacket over wearing an actual Rolex.  A string of pearls versus a diamond necklace. (I don’t know about that one..)

Wearing things that catch her eye get better results than wearing things that will catch a man’s eye.   A lot of high dollar and very sought after cars are usually trumped by the guy on a motorcycle.

Looking “high status”/”high value” is something that’s different for a man, versus a woman.

For the prime market – not the mature women.

• Lil Baby beats Barack.
• Timothy Chalamee beats Timothy Oliphant

With these things in mind, the game of old, with its peacocking, high energy routines, comedy, intrigue, mystery – these are all modalities that appeal to women.  Poorly calibrated this can turn a man into a dancing monkey, into “entertainment”, but properly calibrated a taste of novelty entices the audience, but to get more they have to cooperate.

That’s all well and good.  Heard it all before (c) Sunshine Anderson.

What are the new insights in this video?

Tyler starts to talk about the LA guys that crush it. That are better than him, and better than anyone on YouTube/”in the community”.

…I know here and the guys who have the best results with dating and I can tell you that their results are outside so these would typically be guys that have um 30 girlfriends at once um go home with somebody different every night and is pretty much across the board famous pop stars models creme de creme Instagram models best girls in the club and there’s one commonality that these guys all have and you want what it is they’re all idiots, straight up

Nothing groundbreaking here.  The first question is “how”?

At this point Tyler has thoroughly stepped away from the looks, muscles and money paradigm.  And we’ve known from the very beginning that “intelligence” and wisdom are no goes when it comes to short term relationships with the prime market.

So how is idiocy an aphrodisiac?

1. 1. They’re idiots who don’t make sense but here’s the other one
   2. They pump their state while collapsing the criteria to have value

okay they pump their state while collapsing the criteria to have value so here’s the difference between them and you. You believe that you have to build value for yourself to get in the zone  

Per Tyler, “we” (aka the average rookie trying to get better) believe that we need money, that we need muscles, that we need fame/power/status, a blue check mark and a million instagram followers – which is what the modern PUA aka Red Pill movement pushes.  Which is also in line with what society tells us what to do.

Okay, yeah, blah blah blah, value/state whatevs…

What’s hidden in the Tyler/RSD analysis is this concept of “state pump”.

Back in the day, if you’d been toiling away at HTML (we’re talking about the start of the world wide web), you were probably not in a talkative mood, much less that infectious energy you get when you’re around people that you want to talk to.  That type of energy is necessary to talk to random strangers and cute girls in the night life.

To get to this energy, to get to “state”, you needed to get past that initial friction of talking to strangers.

So traditionally this was Richard Gere in The Gigolo, getting ready to go out, putting together his outfit, putting on cologne, listening to some good music.  The next part of getting into state are those first conversations, to warm up the tongue and the social muscles.

As a guy that’s been doing this for a long time, the solo prep is easy.

1) Approach Anxiety plus 2) not being in state are what stops most newbs from making their first approach.

And if there are longer term self image issues or underlying mental traumas AND social programming – it’s very hard to start.

If you’ve been watching and learning from Tyler for as long as I have, you know that from the BluePrint Decoded days, Tyler’s been searching for a way to be “in state” all of the time.

From my understanding, that doesn’t mean talkative and talking to people all of the time.  That would not be possible, and in many situations, not socially calibrated. (Bro, *sips Kool-Aid*, social calibration is a limiting belief!)

In State all of the Time seems to be the ideal.

And realization of that ideal is “The Idiot”.

The “idiot” – has little to no approach anxiety, has no need to build himself up, because he already think he’s the ish.  He can’t contemplate even the concept of value.  He’s “in his own reality”.

• YaReally talked about this.
• Roissy called this delusional confidence – emphasis on delusional.  (or was it irrational confidence)
• He who shall not be named talked about this, but I’ve already said too much.
• RSD Julien had a video/lecture – “You are enough”

I think the concept is fairly understandable by the reader.

As me and the homie Perp have often discussed, how does a thinking man get to be like this?

As a Man Thinketh…but if this requires no thinking….

TBC…

This will probably get taken down, but I felt so moved by it (not in a good way) that I wanted to comment on it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlqn9yTsDS8&ab_channel=OwenCook

Let’s be clear – Owen is saying something that the community has known since the inception.

• • Getting Rich doesn’t get you girls
  • Getting Jacked doesn’t get you girls

There’s no controversy there at all.

Not from me, and not from anyone that hits the clubs.

He’s essentially got beef with everyone else in the “sphere” that’s pushing this “build it and they will come” mentality.  Anyone talking about monk mode IS NOT YOUR FRIEND.

There are plenty of rich guys in NYC who do not have the dating life one would expect from earning half a million dollars or more.  Indeed, some ways to make money – are counter-productive to meeting women and being social.

When it comes to getting jacked – You’re a hater if you say it doesn’t get you attention.  It gets you positive attention.

I kid, I kid.

Women are still primates, still animals.  Showing a strong and healthy body goes right to that part in her brain – however that’s within reason.

The “Face Card” beats the “body card” and the “bank balance ” card.  And the offline real world fame card beats them all.

I digress.

Owen (and Madison as well) are addressing this trend in “the manosphere” to use the term High Value Man which they describe as as getting rich and getting jacked.

No.

The person who came up with the term, HVM, was…

1. Kevin Samuels
2. Was not talking about changing yourself to get women
3. Actually went at length to describe the problems with a massive notch count
4. And said it might have been his term, but it wasn’t his concept.  Across every culture and throughout time – the men who made the world go round had these qualities.

The Criteria as laid about by Kevin.

1. Above Average Income (price of admission)
2. That income for a sustained amount of time (not a flash in the pan)
3. Recognized by others in the fraternity of important money earners
4. Had a Network of people, not a lone wolf.
5. Utility – Needed by the group
6. Visibility – not vague ways of making money and participating in society, but something readily understandable

Kevin, coming from a Oklahoma/Texas and then NYC and ATL – had the dollar figure at 100K, but the number is not so important.  50 bucks an hour in NYC is at the upper end of working class.  People that work for the City make that sort of money.

But if you understand who this guy is – it’s not the guy at the club, not the guy with the great instagram.

Value to whom?

To society.

The type of person that’s an HVM is the sort of person called to run for office, or to build their factory in a certain part of town, wanted to speak at charity dinners. That sort of top level stuff, that society only entrusts to certain people.

What about women?

Women aren’t necessarily repulsed by conventional success, but it’s not what gets them going.

In particular, the type of women that men pursue, typically college aged to early career, attractive, no children, etc – they’re not hanging out at Hackathon’s trying to snag the winner.

They want to go to clubs, drink, dance, have fun, and maybe meet an NBA player.  I don’t just mean thots, I mean average college educated, has a decent job, type woman that’s attractive.

The desire for financial stability comes with age, but most women don’t care if the guy is a mover and shaker around town.  It’s not part of the calculus.

Let’s do a recap before part 2

• Owen is right about money and muscles are not the easy button for chicks.
• Owen is right to criticize the manosphere
• The manosphere is wrong to change the definition of HVM
• But even the proper defintion of HVM is not the “cheat” code for getting broads. (neither getting rich nor getting jacked is easy – so if a man decides to do those things, it should be for himself)