The Good and Bad of the “Gurus”

As my “About Me” blurb says, I’ve been around the pickup “scene” for a decade and a half.  At least the online scene — I’ve never wanted to get to know or hang out with any other “PUA” nor have I attended any seminar or whatever.  I have read tons of literature, though; pretty much all of it I’ve found online.  I haven’t paid for it nor would I.

Anway, I thought I’d do a quick rundown of the good and the bad of each guru’s shit, according to myself.  YMMV.

Ross Jeffries

The NLP “embedded commands” are pure gold.  I’ve heard a recorded SS 3.0 seminar and it’s shit.  The problem with embedded commands is it’s like counting cards in blackjack.  It’s very powerful but hard to get your mind to focus for extended periods of time.  The few times I’ve used embedded commands they’ve worked, though.  And I’m as skeptical as they come.  Also, if you’re just starting out his “Get Laid” newsletters are great if you can find ’em.

R. Don Steele

His books are worth a read-through.  Once.  “How to Date Young Women” is fine.  “Office Politics” and “Body Language Secrets” are good for a read-through.  I read it when I was 22, preparing for my older years.  His concept of keeping 3 girls in your rotation at all times is a good one.  I wouldn’t go to a seminar.  Real basket-cases go to his seminars.

Ray Gordon

Yup, the psycho of  I actually read his “Outfoxing the Foxes.”  He has one good concept, One and Done.  Quite powerful.  The rest I don’t really remember.

David DeAngelo

“Cocky and Funny” is a rule to live by.  His other stuff is rather obvious and unnecessary, IMHO.


His whole Mystery Method is decent, although it’s geared toward a club scene which I’m never in.  The concept of telling long, winding stories is bullshit, IMHO.  I hate people who monopolize a conversation with stories.  He takes peacocking way too far.  DHV spikes are a good concept.  I’d say get hold of everything you can and listen to it twice.  Lots of good stuff, but scattered throughout his lectures.  The Interview Series is a good one if you can find it.


Same as Mystery’s stuff.  Never read “The Game.”


I hear he’s out of jail 😉  “Make the ho’ say no” is a decent mantra, if you keep it within reason.  Always be closing, right?


Perhaps one of the brightest guys out there, currently.  Listen to as much of him as you can.  It’s not always helpful, but there are nuggets of gold which are rather evenly distributed throughout all his stuff.

RSD in general

Most is a waste of time, there’s about 3 minutes of useful material in an hour presentation.  Maybe listen through once.  One Australian lecturer’s comment has stuck with me to this day, though.  He said that a man shouldn’t be entertaining women, he should be “entertaining himself, 100% of the time.”  Totally true.

The other latest guys I’m really not that familiar with, as you can see my experience lies with the real old buggers.  When I started posting in ASF, there was only Jeffries, Steele and Gordon, and I don’t really keep up with the billion “gurus” who have sprung up in the past few years.  But I will be listening to some of their shit in the coming weeks.

Of the blogs, Roissy/Heartiste’s is the one that I continually come back to, though much of it is shaming older women these days.  Don’t know why.  Roosh V is also a good one.  You should go to each of those blogs and read every single post in both of them, taking the good parts and discarding the political statements and all the other bullshit that isn’t germane to boning chicks.

My theory for learning Pickup is this: Read or listen to everything and let your own experience tell you what to pick out.  Very good stuff is about 30% good, 70% chaff.  Other stuff is lower.  But even if you listen to 6 hours of utter nonsense, the guy might say one thing that’s pure gold.  Don’t follow any “guru” completely and don’t exclude anyone out-of-hand.  The only real things you’ll have to “practice” are the NLP stuff and the rather complex steps in the Mystery Method process.

Otherwise just kick back and enjoy.  And don’t pay a fucking dime.


Game Attitude vs. Game Technique

One of my rules is that “Game is merely the simulation of having women in one’s life.”  By that I’m speaking of Attitudinal Game.

Game is broken down into two aspects, Attitude and Techniques.  Some day you will realize that these are actually the same thing, but that’s fairly advanced, so for now we’ll think of them as two separate things.

So my rule above applies specifically to the Attitude part of game.  Your “Game Attitude” is exactly the same as the attitude of a guy who has many beautiful women in life vying for his attention.  Exactly the same.

But what, then, is the “Technique” branch of game.  Well, those are best typified by stuff like the Mystery Method and Ross Jeffries’ Speed Seduction stuff.  They are knowledge-based tactics that are used to consciously and unconsciously persuade women to do what you want them to do.

Proper “Game Attitude” is mandatory for getting laid consistently, but “Game Techniques” are not, though they can help a great deal.  I think both Speed Seduction and Mystery’s/Style’s stuff work as well, and RSD stuff works, David DeAngelo, even R. Don Steele’s body language and office politics books work.  It all works to some degree, all of the theories help you out in some way even if you don’t follow them exactly.  All of them are about 30% truth and about 70% bullshit.  You can figure out what’s what.  Master it all as far as I’m concerned.  And no I’ve never spent a dime on any of it.

Ross Jeffries’ 1994-97 “Get Laid” newsletters were great for Game Attitude.  They really helped me out at the time.  I wish I knew where to find those again.

And, like I said, at an advanced level your attitude and your techniques are revealed as one sort of giant amalgam of “Alphaness.”  But for now I think it’s best to think of them as two things to work on — how you relate to yourself and how you relate to women.  Attitude and Technique.

Interestingly, due to Rule 2, how you feel about yourself is based largely upon how many women you have in your life.  But isn’t that really the case?  We all like to think that we consider ourselves awesomesauce even when we’re sitting alone dateless for years at a time, but that’s simply not how our minds work.  Have many women in your life and your self-attitude will change.  Read Rules 2 and 3 again.

Now, that brings up the big question.  To get Game Attitude you need to be dating multiple women, but to date multiple women you need to have Game Attitude.  How do you get the women in the first place if you need women to get women?  Rule 4.  Rather, a new and somewhat strange look at Rule 4, which we’ll explore next time.

Don’t Take Advice from Bitter Men

In my posts on blogs and forums I tend to battle a lot with guys who are giving advice about banging broads but seem to have a tremendous amount of bitterness toward women.

The whole “men’s rights” movement and the “manosphere” and all that nonsense unfortunately permeates dating blogs and forums.  This is fairly recent, maybe the past 4-5 years.  Back in the late 90s and early 2000s, guys would talk about the best ways of getting pussy and the disagreements would arise about that.

But these days it seems that half the “seduction” blogs are about how awful the world is and how “feminism” is destroying western culture, etc. etc. blah blah.  I’m not going to touch on feminism again because I already did and quite frankly it bores me.  I like talking about techniques to bone down on hotter and more women, not about women’s political beliefs or the deluded versions of those beliefs that “men’s rights” guys throw out and then attack.

Instead I’ll discuss those dudes themselves, and hopefully for the last time.  I want to get to the fun stuff about banging women here shortly.

So, here’s my guideline, I won’t call it a rule: Bitter men are not successful with women.

As I posted on one of the forums:

Guys who are making money don’t bitch about the economy; guys who just won their lawsuit don’t bitch about the court system; and guys who are getting laid don’t bitch about women.

The point is, if you’re having success, you aren’t angry at the system in which you are having success.  Winners don’t complain, they bask in their victories.  Losers do complain, because it’s too much for most people to blame themselves for losing so they externalize the blame and foist it on some other entity.

Men who are unsuccessful with women blame women, or they blame “feminism,” or they blame society.

Unfortunately, this means that guys who are posting advice on their blogs or in forums, and are also posting hateful diatribes against women, should be disregarded.  If their advice isn’t working for them — ie., it’s not getting them laid — it’s probably not going to work for you either.

If you follow any advice, make sure it’s from guys who are happy, healthy, and are clearly successful.  Of course anybody on the internet can start a blog and lie about all the hotties he’s pulling from the clubs every week.  Those should be pretty obvious to spot as frauds, because that shit just doesn’t happen — no guy except maybe Warren Beatty or Bon Jovi has pulled chicks with that much ease.

But the other guys, who claim to be banging women yet at the same time have real obvious bitterness toward women, aren’t on the up-and-up either.  How could they be?  If you’re winning with the broads you’re going to think the mating market is fantastic.  And you’re certainly not going to be pissed at women or cynical about the mating system — it’s working for you and you’re having a great time.

So that’s all I want to say about this topic, and I really want to get away from the energy-sucking vampiric nature of these guys.  They aren’t winning in the mating market, they hate themselves and women, and they cast their dark shadows over every forum they visit.  It’s not bad to be losing in the mating market or in life — I was a major loser with women in my mid-20s — but it’s unhealthy to externalize your failure and blame women for it.

No man should be taking advice from bitter men if he wants a healthy, happy, and pussy-filled life.

Rule 4: You Must Lie to Women

So this brings me to my most controversial rule, Rule 4: You Must Lie to Women.

Most guys believe, and most “game” advice states, that a man who is really in control should be able to do what he wants and let women know what he wants and they’ll be cool with it.  ‘Cause he’s a man, he’s big pimpin’, he’s got tight game, and so if he wants to bang lots of broads he can come right out and say it and, voilà, the women will accept it.

If this is you, more powa’ to ya.  Unfortunately, in my experience, shit just don’t work that way.

Socialization exists.  We have to deal with it.  That is, people are socialized to view certain behaviors in certain lights, and such socialization is very powerful.  In our monogamous society, we are all socialized to view “couples,” and specifically heterosexual couples, as the norm.  Polygamy is really, really frowned upon.

No matter how much a chick is in love with the studliest Alpha-male she’s ever met, she’s got all of her upbringing telling her that she is “special” and that she deserves a man who thinks she’s special too.  Special enough that he will eschew all women other than her.  But on the other hand, she’s got 3.5 billion years of evolution stating that she should find the guys that other women love.

So, we have a problem. On one hand her hindbrain is telling her to find a guy that other women love.  On the other hand her neocortex tells her to find a loyal mate.  What’s your solution: you lie.

Here’s the thing: what constitutes a “lie” to men is different than what constitutes a “lie” to women.  Women fully expect an Alpha to be banging other women.  They understand this at a gut level.  They want it, in fact.  However, their socialization runs counter to this.  Therefore when you lie you are, in a way, doing women a big favor.  And in reality it’s not just a favor, it’s a necessity.

Listen and listen closely to this, because once you understand it you will understand women at a level deeper than you ever thought possible:

It is not “immoral” to tell a woman that she is the only one in your life when in fact there are others.  It is only immoral and blameworthy when you are so careless as to let her find out you are banging other women.

Here’s an example.  Tiger Woods.  Do you really think his wife didn’t realize at some level that he was banging other women?  Ha.  He banged dozens of other chicks during their marriage.  Ain’t no way she didn’t know.  But the shit didn’t hit the fan until some tabloid published his liaisons for all the world to see.  That very night, the night that the tabloid came out on the stands, she chased him out of the house and bashed the shit out of his car while he was trying to drive away. Why?  Not because he was banging other women, but because he was careless enough to let the damn thing get found out and shoved in front of her face and everyone else’s faces.

Here’s another example.  Do you really think that Sandra Bullock didn’t realize her man Jesse James was banging other women?  It wasn’t until she won an academy award and one of his catty other bitches tried to derail her happiness by blabbing about it in the papers that their marriage unraveled.

I’ll give you an example from my own life.  (And I’m not calling myself an “Alpha” on par with these other guys, though I do have some Alpha traits.)  I had a long-term girlfriend who came over once and found another woman’s pair of undies under my bed.  She was livid.  But what she said when she was yelling at me made me take note.  She said, “I can’t believe you let me find those!”  I can’t believe you let me find those.  Not “I can’t believe you screwed some other chick.”  She was upset that I cared so little about her that I didn’t bother covering up my tracks.  She wasn’t (really) upset that I was banging another chick.  I was Alpha enough in her eyes that she understood that I’d have other women in my life.  She was upset that I showed her the disrespect of letting her find evidence of it.  (And despite the drama she didn’t break up with me, by the way.)

So you see, “morality” for women is not about you being “faithful.”  It’s about you caring enough to make her believe that she is special in your eyes.  And that requires a lot of care.  Enough care that you are willing to tell her she’s the only one in your life, when in fact she’s not and you both know it.  Enough care that you are willing to go the extra mile to clean up any evidence of other women and convince her that she’s the only woman on your mind when you’re together.

Because deep down inside she doesn’t want to be the only woman in your life.  Remember, women attract women.  She wants to be part of your harem, hopefully your best girl.  But deep down inside she wants to know that you are banging other women, yet care enough about her to never let her find out.

I remember listening to Tom Leykis years ago and he had a youngish woman on who was giving dating advice to men.  Now, normally a woman’s dating advice to men is utterly worthless and it would be best to do exactly the opposite of what they recommend.  But this woman had some advice that was so interesting that I remember it almost a decade later.

The woman said, “She wants to be your number one, not your only one.”  That is, at a gut level the women in your life may want to be the most special woman in your harem, but they certainly don’t want to be the only woman in your harem.  I’d never heard this before and never since.   But it is the truth, and it’s a great way of putting it.

So, you must tell her she’s the only woman in your life to appease her socialization.  You must bang other women to keep her interested in you at a gut level.  To satisfy these conflicting drives, you must “lie” to women.

Here’s an aside: No woman will ever agree with the above stuff.  Or very, very few.  Why?  Because when you ask women to analyze stuff, their neocortex — the socialized part of their brain — is the part that’s doing the talking.   And in a patriarchal society, where men try to control women to a great degree, women have a much larger difference between their natural drives and their socialization than men do.  That is to say, they have been socialized away from their natural instincts to a greater degree than men have.

So when you ask her about what I’ve said above, she will spout whatever she’s been socialized to spout.  And she really does believe what she’s saying.  Of course her actions will usually be entirely different.  This is the reason men say “look at what she does, not what she says” if you want to understand what’s really going on.

Rule 3: Date Multiple Women, Always

We’ve determined in previous posts that women attract women, and that “game” is the simulation of having multiple women in one’s life.  What comes next and is derived from those two things is:

Rule 3: Date Multiple Women, Always

(By “date” I mean “have a sexual relationship with.”  I don’t necessarily mean taking them out on classic “dates.”  I certainly don’t mean “courting” or “wooing” them.  My “dates” usually consist of going out for drinks, then back to her place to fuck, maybe watch some TV, shoot the shit, walk around town, smoke a joint, that sort of thing.  The only thing that’s mandatory is the sex.  I use the word “date” because it’s short and easy to remember.  But as we’ll see in another post, the concept of taking a woman you haven’t screwed yet out to dinner and movies is no longer relevant in the 21st Century.)

You should always have 2-4 women in your life.  More if you can swing it.  By “in your life” I mean these should be women you are seeing at least every couple of weeks and whom you screw every time you see them.  Maybe you see Girl A twice a week, Girl B every two weeks, and Girl C, who lives 100 miles away, once a month.  That’s fine.

How to get these women in the first place is a subject for another day.  Right now we’ll concentrate on the fact that you should constantly, and I mean constantly, have more than one woman in your life.

R. Don Steel in his book, “How to Date Young Women for Men Over 35,” suggested having 3 girls at all times, because 2 is dangerously close to 1, which inevitably leads to 0.  This is a decent rule.  My math goes something like this.

4 girls = 4 girls

3 girls = 3 girls

2 girls = 2 girls (barely)

1 girl = 0 girls

Read that again.  You will notice that having one girl leads to having no girls.  This always happens.  If women attract women, and they’re the only thing that attracts women, then when your one girl sniffs around and doesn’t pick up the scent of other women on you, she will leave.  Might not be today, might not be this week, but it will happen.

You may have heard this rule summarized as “keep spinning plates, ” or “have a harem,” or whatnot.  This rule is not as controversial as my others.  However, there is one point that must be made.  It’s the last word — “Always.”  “Date Multiple Women, Always.”  This in fact means ALWAYS.  That is, for your whole life.

This means that unless you are a Mormon, you will never be married.  Yep, that’s right.  You will not be getting married this lifetime.  You will be dating, screwing, and in general having relationships with multiple women until the day you die.  But let’s face it, marriage is an obsolete institution anyway.  I for one don’t shed a tear for its demise.  Of course, some of you have deep-seated urges to find that special someone, settle down, and raise children.  Those types should not be reading this blog.

This is one of the few periods in human history when men have been able to do this — get laid and have semi-regular relationships with several women at once (who rotate in and out of your life on varying schedules).  And not have to be rich to do it.

This also means that if you have 2 women in your life and one dumps you, you better find another one ASAP.  Like right away.  If you have 3 women and 2 dump you in succession, which does happen sometimes, you need to get out there and find another.  If your “harem” drops to 1 girl, you have to make it your life’s immediate mission to find another one, to the exclusion of all else, until you’ve found one.  Literally.  Unless you don’t mind starting back from square-one, completely alone (which does happen too, though hopefully no more than a couple of times in your life).

So that’s the third rule.  The next rule will address how to reconcile the fact that your needs as a man differ from society’s needs.

Feminism and the Male Birth Control Pill

For the past couple of decades or so, researchers have been.. well.. researching an oral male contraceptive.  A male birth control pill. It would be reversible unlike vasectomies and wouldn’t interfere with the sex act itself like condoms do.

I’m all for male oral contraceptives and frankly I’d be first in line if one ever does come out.  It’s purely to protect myself of course.  No desire to have some random chick I’ve boned call me up a few months later telling me I’m a daddy.

And from a sociological standpoint I think it’s good too.  It would dramatically reduce unwanted kids if the pill were cheap enough that every shmuck in the land could afford to take it.  Women could take theirs, men could take theirs, and children would only be born when both parents actually wanted them.  Great for men, great for mankind.

(There is one downside I’ll point out later, but I think it would be overshadowed by the upsides.)

However, leave it to the “men’s rights” bloggers to turn this into an anti-woman campaign.  According to them, all sorts of “feminists” are against a male birth control pill because it would decrease women’s “power” to get pregnant and then wring men for all sorts of child support.

Now, this very thing is exactly what I’d want to protect myself against, but I certainly don’t think that “feminists” are out to do it en masse.  I just want to avoid the small percentage of crazy bitches out there who are willing to try, or who are just too lazy to take their pills.  In no way do I think a major segment of the female population is even interested in this.  And least of all feminists.

One blog which will remain nameless and linkless has the following embarrassingly worthless, childish, omega-male comment on it:

“Feminists consider a male birth control pill as rape. To a feminist, the ability of all women to control a man’s life, earnings, and liberty is a God given right. I no longer try to understand this, I simply accept that there exist individuals who believe that women are human and men are beasts of burden indentured to serve the ‘humans’.”

First off, this is precisely why I don’t allow comments here.  Second, what sort of a lunatic actually believes this?  The ultimate whip-me omega who probably has dark fantasies about being ball-gagged by a dominant woman.  I sense real pathology in that post and I hope whoever wrote it is seeing a psychiatrist so we don’t read in the paper about another dude who shot up a women’s gym or a hair salon.

In truth, here’s a self-described feminist woman’s take on things called Where is the Male Birth Control Pill?

And another, entitled Why is There Still No Male Contraceptive Pill?:

The second one makes the common assumption that the pill will be taken by men in a committed monogamous relationship and the woman will not be taking any form of birth control.  It brings up the “what if he forgets” argument.  Though this is a fallacy — I believe that most male OC will be taken by single guys like myself who are protecting themselves, and therefore have a very real incentive to avoid forgetting about it.

But neither one takes a stand against male contraception itself.  And, in fact, I’d love for someone, ANYONE, to point out any feminist article or blog post that takes a stand against the male birth control pill.  Oh wait, you can’t because I don’t allow comments and also because there is no such article or blog post!

The one female-written anti-male-BCP article I could find mentions nothing of feminism:–end-happy-little-accidents.html

And, in fact, the article itself states, “[A]s Professor Richard Anderson of the University of Edinburgh says: ‘When we carried out surveys of women, they were enormously enthusiastic [about the male birth control pill].'”

So to think that feminists (real feminists that is, not these crazy nutbags’ idea of feminists) give two shits about a male birth control pill is simply insane.  I’m sure if you polled real feminists, 90% of them would be strongly in favor of men having the ability to choose for themselves if/when to have kids.

Now, here’s the downside to mens’ oral contraceptives, from a sociological perspective.  Many men wear condoms to avoid getting broads pregnant.  In doing so, they also protect themselves and the broads from STDs.  If a man goes on the pill and stops wearing condoms, he runs a higher likelihood of getting an STD or of passing one on.

This is a downside, I’ll admit.  But, everything has downsides and I think the upsides outweigh it.

So researchers, please continue researching a male birth control pill.  I want one!

“Feminism” benefits single men the most

For some reason, almost every single man who blogs about the mating market, and “game” in particular, is against “feminism.”  Actually they’re against their own fairytale versions of feminism, because when they point out the parts of feminism that they hate, it becomes clear that they aren’t talking about real feminism at all.

I consider myself to be a feminist.  The reason I’m a feminist is not because I think it somehow benefits women — it may or may not, I don’t know and I don’t care.  The reason I’m a feminist is because it benefits ME.

I make no bones about the fact that I’m out to bang as many reasonably attractive broads as I possibly can before I die, plus have some long-term, some medium-term, and a whole lot of short-term relationships while I’m at it.  Feminism lets that happen for me.

Here’s why: I’m fucking broke.  And, given my lazy attitude, which I talked about in a previous post, I probably always will be.  Back in the pre-feminist days, the only guys who could bang tons of broads were rich, because women had to get a payday for giving up their precious reproductive access.  Average assholes like myself would have to “court” women and eventually settle down before we could screw.  We’d be lucky if we banged a few women in a lifetime.

Thanks to feminism, women are trained to delay marriage (sometimes forever) and to embrace their masculine aspects which means they can screw freely.  They can screw without the expectation that the man will “provide” for them, since they can provide for themselves.  This is beautiful for me.  I thank feminist ideals every day.  It also means I don’t have to open doors, buy them shit, treat them like delicate flowers or anything like that, which appeals to my poor ass as well as my general laziness.  I also love to have women drive me around.  Can you imagine a pre-feminist man being driven around by his women?  Only pimps could get away with that without being looked at as less of a man.  Now any guy can.

I’ve dated a lot of women in my life, and almost always it’s the more “feminist” ones who are the easiest to deal with.  They’re not the ones calling me up in the middle of the night saying, “My computer stopped working, come over and fix it!”  Nor are they the ones who open their car trunk and say, “You’re the man, carry this heavy object up to my apartment.”  Fuck that, I like women who can take care of themselves.  I’m an adult, you’re an adult, don’t expect me to handle your shit for you.

Some of the above bloggers might say that “feminism will bring the downfall of man.”  I have no idea — I doubt it will — but even if I accepted that argument… I don’t give a fuck.  Once I’m dead the world can go to shit as far as I’m concerned.  I won’t be around to care.  However, conservative “Chicken Little” arguments almost never pan out anyway, so even if I did care I wouldn’t lose any sleep over feminism bringing down the western world.  I thought American culture was supposed to collapse when we didn’t get a flag-burning amendment and when the gays were allowed to marry anyway.

Single men who want to get laid easily and inexpensively — feminism is your friend.