Skip to content

seduction liar crybabies

I was recently talking to someone about my debacle at Thundercat’s Seduction Lair. Why did they all resent me so much? Suddenly, a metaphor popped into my head. “Game” is like poker. If you have a good hand, you’re confident and no one can frazzle you. But if you’re dealt a crap hand in life (like these guys), you either become a 40-year-old Dungeon Master, or learn how to bluff. So the PUAs learn how to bluff. By definition they don’ t have good hands, or they wouldn’t need to perfect their poker face.

So there I go, Miss Over-Analytical; I walk into their “Boys Only” poker game, and walk around the table and start calling their hands. They hate this, because they’ve been convinced that “the Game” has nothing to do with the cards they’re holding. And it may not, but no one likes to hear that they have a bad hand. And maybe that’s a lesson I can take away: People don’t like their neuroces handed to them on a silver platter.

7 Comments

  1. Eats wrote:

    I think they came after you because whilest you broke down a lot of there methods, I don’t think you told them anything they didn’t already recognize. I.E. going to a magicians convention and explaining the tricks as “fake magic.”

    And because you’re a girl. And because they don’t know you. I wonder if you would have had similar responses (or even worse) if you had not released your gender.

    On the subject of being dealt a bad hand – I can speak to that directly. And if it needs any further NOTE: Warrior can attest to my numerous disqualifications.

    Game doesn’t turn a bad hand into a good one (i.e. my borish intercostals) but it chooses the right configuration of cards to move forward on. And also allows you to recognize ways to let go of things you think are good – but are hurting you.

    Here’s an example in poker terms.

    Let’s say we’re playing 5 card draw. Please see the key below for any questions on nomenclature.

    You’re initially dealt:

    6c 6d Kd Qd 9d

    You’ve already got a pair of eights, but are they enough to stand up? It’s a decent pair, I suppose? But it’s probably not going to get you too far.

    Let’s say the first bet around the table is minimal (5% of your total stack). So you stay in.

    What do you discard?

    I say you discard the 6c and go for the flush or the higher pair. And you represent a good hand (which you already have) by discarding the one card. And then you’re taking advantage of 4 cards in your hand, rather than the 2 (eights) that you were planning on leaning on.

    And perhaps in taking advantage of those 4 cards and drawing a new 1, you’ll find something even stronger.

    Warrior, your thoughts?

    KEY:
    d = diamond; h = heart; c = club; s = spade

    Friday, February 3, 2006 at 9:26 pm | Permalink
  2. michael wrote:

    where did the 8′s come from?

    Saturday, February 4, 2006 at 1:20 pm | Permalink
  3. Eats wrote:

    It’s a typo, I don’t know how to correct it.

    Thanks for bringing it up.

    Love,

    EATS

    Saturday, February 4, 2006 at 3:56 pm | Permalink
  4. Yeah, I don’t know, Eats. Ross Jeffries has this whole theory about how all of the things that society says are “desirable” character traits (e.g. money, status, good looks, an attractive personality) are just “the man’s” way of keeping you down, and attractiveness is all about “giving women what they want”, which, in my opinion, is a weak justification for mind control over self-improvement. And I should also clarify that most of the guys thought it was hilarous and spot-on that I was calling people out. Only Ross and a few other insecure guys felt the need to cut me down. So I guess that confirms your idea that they know what I’m telling them, and the ones who have identity without “Game” could laugh at themselves a bit.

    But I definately agree with the idea of giving up what you think is valuable, taking risks. Risk taking itself is attractive.

    And by the way, do I have to get you a copy editor, Eats?

    Sunday, February 5, 2006 at 1:35 pm | Permalink
  5. Eats wrote:

    Yes, I would love a copy editor, where I can revise my comments if necessary.

    Or if you meant a staff member or intern who reviewed my content before it came public – I’d like that, too.

    Monday, February 6, 2006 at 4:40 pm | Permalink
  6. Honestly, I wouldn’t let Ross Jeffries and his disciples frazzle you.

    RJ’s been in a losing position for years now, advocating what is essentially untested social theories and tactics. *shrug*

    He’s built up a cult of personality and if you’ve read Neil’s book The Game, you’ll realize that RJ is a neurotic, jealous, paranoid little man.

    Consider yourself in good company to be on his shitlist.

    Thursday, February 23, 2006 at 7:04 pm | Permalink
  7. spike wrote:

    haha, this is amazing.
    i’m really glad that people randomly stumble upon AF, it makes me smile.
    But he has a point, i thought RJ was crazy too. You should’ve seen him at his Chicago seminar, he was pissed that he didn’t have all the attention-of course you have to at least pretend like your paying attention to the women…

    Friday, February 24, 2006 at 2:57 pm | Permalink

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *
*
*