>
Recently, “game” guru Roissy offered his readers a list of “Cheap And Easy Ways To Raise Your Value To A Girl.” Most were fairly standard pick up artist tricks of the “act like an aloof jerk and she’ll worship you” variety. According to Roissy, though, these little tricks will miraculously enable guys
to date women one to three points higher than you could be expected to get by societal standards. Do these to a girlfriend and you will be a god to her. A god among penii.
A few examples:
Don’t call back right away. Done properly, you will start to hear girls say things like “I didn’t hear back from you. You were making me nervous!”
Don’t live together. It’s much harder to project mystery living under the same roof, watching each other fold laundry every week. (Not to mention side action will be more difficult to coordinate.)
Cancel dates. (Make the reason seem apparently legitimate, but suspicious.)
Muse wistfully about past lovers.Never do her a favor before you’ve had sex with her.
Never laugh at her jokes, even when they’re funny. If you must, chuckle under your breath.
When at her place, eat all her food, leave the seat up, change her TV channels, and torture her cat. Act like it’s your second home.
Bo-ring. These tricks may have worked on women once upon a time, but today’s women are far too sophisticated to fall for these tired old ruses . If you really want to score with the hot babes of today, you’ve got to kick your game up a notch — or three. To help, I have come up with some “New and Improved Cheap And Easy Ways To Raise Your Value To A Girl.”
Wear a banana peel on your head like a hat. This will help to create an aura of “mystery” around yourself, as well as a lovely banana-y scent that will follow you everywhere.
Poke her nose playfully after sex and say, in a cheerful voice, “Hitler was right about you!” She will ponder this one for days.
Never laugh at her jokes. Instead, fall to the floor and begin singing “Rock Me Amadeus.”
Go out on “dates” with imaginary people. Introduce her to these people, and slyly suggest a “threesome.” (Or a “foursome,” if you are dating two imaginary people at the same time.)
Muse wistfully about butter.
Don’t buy her gifts. Instead, sneak clumps of dirt into her lingerie drawer.
Never call her back right away. Instead, hide under her bed and make low moaning sounds.
If you end up in an argument with her, shout out “mom always loved you better!” Then set her couch on fire.
Don’t move in with her. Instead, move into the apartment above hers, and watch her through tiny holes drilled in the floor.
When at her place, eat her cat, torture her TV, and replace her toilet with a sack of potatoes. Act like Meryl Streep in Sophie’s Choice, including the accent.
Go forth, my young apprentices, and score like never before!
—
If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.
>"Ozymandias said… At risk of pimping my blog, I would like to point out a post I did relevant to the issue of "whether women like nice guys": http://ozymandias3.blogspot.com/2011/02/its-always-more-complicated-and-playing.html February 3, 2011 2:03 PM Ozymandias said… Dammit, why didn't the link work? February 3, 2011 2:04 PM "You weren't acting cocky enough.
>Captain Bathrobe:I'll speak slowly so even you can understand it.A. Guys not getting their advice on relationship from feminism -the one modern political movement that claims to be the end-all and be-all for all your "gender" needs.B. I've done my part (as has Roissy) to add practical real world legal considerations to the PUA's. That is "marriage 2.0", insanely overbroad definitions of rape and domestic violence. This creates a lot of anger in guys when they learn this stuff.C. Men who learn this stuff no longer pedestalize women. Thus women get more pushback both politically and personally in their relationships.Now I hope THAT explained things.
>"Riddle me this: if I was such a phony nice guy before and women could see through my exterior to my dark and twisted soul, then why did they all think I was sweet and funny? Why did they all want to be my friend?"Women are taught to be nice under all circumstances. Therefore, they are likely to tell you you are sweet and funny and they want to be your friend when they tell you they do not want to be in a relationship with you.
>Oz, to get clickable links, Blogger stupidly requires you to type in the actual html code for a link, as I have done here:Funny dating charts post
>Roman Candle, most Nice Guys(TM) are not sadists that torture small animals, they are boring guys that spend their days playing video games and that's why they are unpopular with women. And ever heard of LBJF (let's be just friend) ? If a woman think that you are a boring guy, she will not throw eggs at you, she will say that she accept only to be your friend, but for her it means "get lost loser". And since the nice guy(TM) doesn't understand it, he still expect that she will eventually fall in love with him. That's why Nice Guys (TM) end up very frustrated.
>""Riddle me this: if I was such a phony nice guy before and women could see through my exterior to my dark and twisted soul, then why did they all think I was sweet and funny? Why did they all want to be my friend?"Women are taught to be nice under all circumstances. Therefore, they are likely to tell you you are sweet and funny and they want to be your friend when they tell you they do not want to be in a relationship with you. "And this doesn't mean, RomanCandle, that you are a mean nasty guy. Just that they don't want to date you. Maybe you're unpleasantly clingy — a lot of NiceGuy (TM) types are.
>Elizabeth:For the second time, no, I'm not torturing cats. I find it kinda weird that I have to deny this twice.If you had bothered to read my posts, you'd realize that I actually own two cats. One of them, no lie, is purring in my lap as I type this! And I doubt Roissy tortures cats, either. It's called hyperbole, and it's Roissy's bread and butter.
>"I doubt Roissy tortures cats, either. It's called hyperbole, and it's Roissy's bread and butter."When feminists use hyperbole it's taken dead serious. How interesting when the tables are turned.
>AVpd:I agree with most of what you just wrote, and you kind of prove my point for me. I think maybe you didn't catch my earlier posts? If you only saw part of what I quoted from earlier, I can see how'd you'd make that mistake.The whole point I've been trying to make is that I'm no longer a Nice Guy (TM) because I was tired of getting the LJBF. And that's what I'm now getting criticized and called a misogynist for…no longer being a nice guy. And you know what? That's fine. I'm a big boy, and I can deal with feminists being snarky at me. But what I'm also trying to convince you all of is that there's a method to my madness. I behave this way not because I hate women or because I was born evil. I behave this way because women reward it. Because it works.
>Ozymandias:You make an interesting point with your chart there. Correct me if I'm wrong, but your argument is essentially this: women want to date guys who are nice, but also interesting. And if a nice guy gets rejected, it's not because he's nice, but because he is uninteresting.It's not a bad point, but it has a fatal flaw: There's a huge overlap between "nice" and "boring", and between "interesting" and "douchebag". It's very difficult for a guy to be interesting and nice at the same time, at least when he's trying to make a first impression.Conversely, "interesting" and "douchebag" usually go hand-in-hand. It's been my experience that the more confident you are, the better. And what is arrogance and douchebaggery but extreme confidence?Most women won't sleep with a nice guy if he's boring, which is fair enough. But you might be surprised how many women will sleep with a jerk if he turns them on. Bottom line: being exciting is more important to women than being nice, generally speaking. Indulge me a bit, and let me paraphrase Machiavelli: "Is it better to be admired or desired? We should wish to be both. But since it is difficult to join them together, it is better to be desired than admired".
>When feminists use hyperbole it's taken dead serious.NO KIDDING!!! I'm sure that Elizabeth was using the "torturing cats" reference in like manner, but the possibility of that doesn't seem to occur to some. Maybe because it's believed that women lack a sense of humour?
>Captain Bathrobe:I'll speak slowly so even you can understand it.I doubt that will help, but go ahead and knock yourself out.A. Guys not getting their advice on relationship from feminism -the one modern political movement that claims to be the end-all and be-all for all your "gender" needs.Now, see, you've changed topics. Now you're talking about relationships; whereas before you were talking about getting laid. My point is that feminism was never about helping guys to get laid. Feminism, however, has transformed modern relationships–something that PUAs seem to have no interest in. Your contention in your previous post appeared to be that feminists were about to get their comeuppance for years of shamefully neglecting men's need for pussy. My point is that it was never feminists's responsibility to begin with.Besides, socially awkward guys have always had trouble getting laid. Feminism didn't cause that. If anything, feminism's questioning of gender roles created space for men to deviate from the masculine ideal. I know you won't believe that, and I don't have time to school you on it, but it's true.B. I've done my part (as has Roissy) to add practical real world legal considerations to the PUA's. That is "marriage 2.0", insanely overbroad definitions of rape and domestic violence. This creates a lot of anger in guys when they learn this stuff.Ah. So it's the usual MRA twaddle about how feminism is responsible for everything bad ever. Why didn't you say so to begin with? You could have saved us both a lot of time."Men who learn this stuff no longer pedestalize women." I rather thought that's what feminism was all about.
>RomanCandle– First of all, the charts are for me dating people, not other people dating people. The same principle works for hot/nice, rich/nice, smart/nice, religious/nice, committed/nice, interested in the same things as me/nice, likes cats/nice…Secondly, for me, "interesting" means two things: a) Code for a certain cluster of nerdy interests (science, SFF, tabletop RPGs, even Cracked.com and shit like that) that I have historically found most attractive and had the best relationships withb) Able to maintain a conversation about his subject of interest for long periods at a time, which satisfies my desire for useless information.I see no reason why those are necessarily correlated with being a douchebag.
>"I doubt Roissy tortures cats, either. It's called hyperbole, and it's Roissy's bread and butter."See the problem with that is that Roissy and his band of not so merry men also post a whole lot of crap on how date rape shouldn't really exist etc and how if a woman goes back to a man's apartment she should know what she is there for (ie sex not a cup of hot milk) and many of the folk over there and at places like the spearhead will advocate that any claims of rape in this case are just slut regret and not rape at all. They will pretty much put the blame on the woman for being stupid (while simultaneously giving bonus rating points to very young and presumably very naive women).While complaining about the 'all men are potential rapist stereotypes', there is also the 'the womyn are gonna get whats cumming to them when we get more men on board' and complaints about whores who go after assholes getting what they deserve'. Its just not that much of a stretch to see if Roissy was arrested for eg murdering one of his 'dates' (not that I am suggesting he would) certain sections of that community saying well 'the whore deserved it – she knew he was an asshole – he even talked about torturing cats – she should have known better' Sure he probably doesn't mean it but some of the elements that post on his website project that sort of thinking online on a regular basis. It becomes a Catch 22. If violent threats/talk is talked its 'legitimate mens anger' or 'hyperbole' but if a womyn fails to heed the warning signs its her fault as she should have seen it coming. Someone who allows that kind of talk on his site shouldn't expect people to accpt that as hyperbole I would think.And I have no problem with the dress nicely and brush your teeth etc side of PUA however a 'neg' will have me smiling sweetly and remembering a previous engagement while backing away. Some of the stuff they suggest there would have me calling security or the cops
>Oh, oh!Captain Bathrobe is a troll.See how he puts words in my mouth that I did not say, and shows an ignorance of history besides? I bet he's too stupid to realize just what in history disproves his assertion about how I'm blaming "feminism for everything bad ever.." but I'd like to see if he has the intelligence of a garden house and can point it out.I don't appreciate people claiming I say things I do not say, so we'll see if he can solve my riddle. If not, into the ignore bin he'll go.And he didn't even notice that I mentioned that I'd run into the "feminism isn't a dating service" argument before. Fine, then stay out of the dating game, and don't regulate or pontificate on it is what *I* say.
>Also I have been known to say after a few drinks 'oh you must be one of those PUA robots – Not interested thank you' in a fairly loud voice (Yes A SHAMING tactic – only I see it more as a public service to both the other women in the room and hopefully the man himself when he sees the interest in the room evaporate)
>RomanCandle said:"I doubt Roissy tortures cats, either. It's called hyperbole, and it's Roissy's bread and butter."I can assure you there are naive guys that believe everything that Roissy says. Just check the number of commentators on his blog that agree with him.
>Insults and a smokescreen of righteous indignation. Yeah, I've heard better.
>Also, "ignorance of history?" You wound me, sir!
>RomanCandle said:"Most women won't sleep with a nice guy if he's boring, which is fair enough. But you might be surprised how many women will sleep with a jerk if he turns them on. "Do you understand that the reasons that a woman sleep with a guy are not the same that the reason she will fall in love with a guy ? A woman can have sex with a jerk because her 'gina tingle but she will not want to fall in love with him because she doesn't want to be abused.
>"I can assure you there are naive guys that believe everything that Roissy says. Just check the number of commentators on his blog that agree with him."Sure there are. So what? Are you saying that everyone expressing a controversial opinion should be held liable for the potential violent actions of their deranged followers?Should I point to Andrea Dworkin and The SCUM Manifesto and blame all of feminism the next time a woman commits an act of violence against a man?Seriously, you people are great at debating the low-hanging fruits of the MRA movement. And you're fantastic at being snarky. I have alot to learn there.But as for convincing me to abandon my caddish ways of projecting a veneer of charming arrogance when I attempt to seduce women? Yeah, not so much.
>"Do you understand that the reasons that a woman sleep with a guy are not the same that the reason she will fall in love with a guy?"Oh most definitely. Alot of times, in fact, they're almost mutually exclusive.Who ever said I was looking to fall in love? You think I want to get married with the divorce and family law courts the way they are? To hell with that scam, no way.
>Seriously, you people are great at debating the low-hanging fruits of the MRA movement. And you're fantastic at being snarky. I have alot to learn there.But as for convincing me to abandon my caddish ways of projecting a veneer of charming arrogance when I attempt to seduce women? Yeah, not so much. Actually, that's a fair point.
>"Women want men who are confident, and that's what a lot of timid Nice Guys don't seem to get."—LVvSIs this because you lack the confidence in yourself so you want someone to over-compensate for that?
>"Is this because you lack the confidence in yourself so you want someone to over-compensate for that?"No, if you lack confidence you cannot sponge it from someone else. It is because you want a partner who is going to be strong and confident in his abilities, a match to you, not leaning on you for support of his ego.