Moma* once asked this question. (coiner of the term lizards)
Why do so many pick up artists/game teachers move from pick up to politics?
I would add to that observation that PUAS move from picking up women, to sales, to politics, and to self improvement.
- Roissy
- Roosh V
- Rollo
- Mark Manson (aka Entropy, who has pretty much disavowed his old identity)
- RSD as a whole, RSD Max in particular
- Style/N. Strauss to some extent
I don’t think I’ve made that switch. I guess I’m sort of “one-note” when it comes the topic of “How to talk to girls at parties”. But hollaring at broads is “evergreen”, and I’ve thought a lot (aka way too much) about it.
I think part of the reason guys make the switch, aside from the bigger dollars and higher respectability, is that Sales, Business, Politics, Self Improvement/Self Development are just easier to talk about.
With pick up, especially really granular things like “what should I text back..” they are difficult to answer. I try to come at things with good faith, and assuming a lot about the encounter. That’s not always right, cause guys ask things, I give answers, and they add in additional facts that change the solution. As has been said, it’s Pick Up Artistry, not Pick Up Science.
But…
Part of something I’ve seen with a number of seducers and pua’s – is that adding those non-pua elements into their styles, into their lives, can get them better numbers and higher quality*.
*Quality is a euphemism for hotness. Higher “quality” does not coincide with other ideas of what makes a high quality woman.
As a result, a lot of those things outside the “core curriculum” filter back into the space.
One of those is Path and Purpose. I swear RSD said this first, and I’m betting it’s from Tony Robbins. (Much like “take massive action”)
But path and purpose has been repeated by plenty of folks like AMS, like Fresh and Fit. Both of those guys are in the Red Pill/Manosphere communities. Whether they want to be in them or not, that’s who they’re associated with.
In the short game – i.e. the cold approach for an SNL – what does path and purpose mean in a practical sense?
Does path and purpose mean that a man needs to show a girl path and purpose in set, in order to increase attraction, increase trust, and possibly increase arousal?
To ask the question is to answer it (c) Obsidian.
I’m already anti-DHV story. I am pro-DHV in the set.
-
- Telling a good story is a DHV.
- The story being a humble brag is not DHV. (and by humble brag, it’s the innocuous detail that you include in the story)
Some of the worst advice that is common in the community is “the girl wants to hear you/see you be passionate about something”.
She doesn’t. And whatever dj, sky diving, mountain climbing, car racing thing that you’re into – most girls don’t care that much. They might like your costume, your archetype – but the details of which generally are not important.
And if your hobbies are RPG’s, video games, underground aka unpopular music, or having the entire Riley Reid discography in your Raid 5 array – keep that to yourself.
So where does purpose come into play?
In my opinion, 2 areas.
The lesser area is that she learns something from you. All of my Exes can now cook. They could not cook when we dated.
The greater area is that if the girl does not match your purpose, does not support you, help you to make it happen – you have a real moral and masculine justification to kick her to the curb.
Q. Do men need purpose?
Probably.
Q. How do you find your purpose?
I don’t know. Looking back at the hobbies/pursuits/interests, along with what we do for money – those things are not necessarily a “purpose”.
For you Last of Us fans out there (currently broadcasting at the time of this writing) – one of the most poignant episodes is about a man finding his purpose in providing for his partner. It was a really good episode imo, but this idea that he found his purpose in his partner, and did not have purpose prior to that…
I found that to be curious, to say the least. Not to deny that we are social animals, but the message….I dunno. Something rubs me wrong about it. If you swapped out the “partner” for a wife and children, I’d still feel some type of way about it.
Is this purpose?
https://youtu.be/UWBOBQm3bFI
Archie
“one of the most poignant episodes is about a man finding his purpose in providing for his partner”
Basically in this scenario she has become his purpose. She couldn’t get much higher on the pedestal than that. It may not be overt, but that’s the effect.
In effect it’s her frame. She requires the provisioning and his purpose is to do that.
It’s a yuge DLV.
A man’s purpose may well, and in most cases probably does, provide the means to provide for his wife / partner and family, but that should be a by product of the purpose.
The purpose itself should be something different if you are to hold it together and not end up in a dead bedroom.
WIA:
@PalmaSailor
Living to provide for a woman is more than a DLV, it’s really a grave mistake because it misdirects a man’s ambitious energy and turns him into a docile servant.
The reason for having a purpose is larger than the dead bedroom outcome.
During the relationship having a purpose gives a man an anchor to keep him steady during her emotional storms.
Ultimately, a man has a purpose outside and greater than the woman so that mentally he is unperturbed by her absence should she decide to leave, or he has chosen to eject her from his life because she doesn’t measure up.
Why is the man with a purpose unmoved and emotionally stout? Because he has to be in order to accomplish the significant work he has to do while alive.
Peace.