Why Do Men Keep Falling for Women's Manipulative Shaming Tactics?

[betterdeal]

Real men couldn't give a lemon scented f*ck what anyone thinks makes a real man

[phillyfan]

"Real men treat women special."

"Real men act like a gentleman."

"Real men protect women."

"Real men work hard and provide for their women and children."

"Real men pick a woman up and drive her around."

"Real men open doors and pull chairs for women."

"Real men carry things for women."

"Real men pay for dates."

"Real men don't let women pay."

"Real men plan dates."

"Real men ask women out."

"Real men approach women first."

"Real men initiate first kiss."

"Real men initiate sex."

"Be a man."

 

"Real men do this" and "real men do that" are very common manipulative tactics that women often use in order to get men do what they want them to do. They are simple yet very powerful and effective tactics that even men themselves have learned to accept and even use them to shame other men.

 

Personally I would never have recognized the existence of these manipulative shaming tactics that are routinely used by women had I not read the book "The Manipulated Man" two years ago.

 

But it saddens me to see that the majority of men are still ignorant of the fact and gleefully strive to meet the psychological deceptions that women constantly throw at them.

 

I wonder what can be done to enlighten men around the world to recognize that women are exploiting their prideful nature in order to do their dirty works?

 

Dude, u mean u r a douche, n u dont like bein reminded of it

 

If my sista dates a dude who thnks treatin her like a gent and everythin on that list is a problem then he aint gona be 2 happy wen he meets me :laugh: oh yea ok maybe not the 2nd to last everythin else is ok LOL

[dasein]

Appears pretty obsessive...

 

This deserves comment, because for the guys the post was meant for, don't let the fact that it's a long post deter you. If you typed out how to do laundry on a home washer/dryer, for example, to a person who had never used detergent or a washer/dryer, the post would be long but the actual doing would be simple. Same with describing a good golf swing to someone with little or no golf experience, the description would seem long but would describe an action that takes about 1 second. The process I describe takes place over an hour or more, so naturally takes longer to describe.

 

Another thing worth mentioning is that the post is not a compilation of seduction "research," but my personal real life experience. I started a serious dating period back in 2001. At first, I had the mediocre success I had always had since HS. I am a fast learner though, and within a year, learned to build attraction quickly in a broad group of women. I had control for the first time in my life. There is a very satisfying feeling when a hot, professional, well-educated woman jumps you in public shortly into a first date. Even more satisfying when you figure out how to duplicate it and most of your dates end in her letting you know very plainly that she is available for sex at your pleasure. Once more, I'm an average guy, average height, decent shape, not rich, not famous.

 

The PUA references and talk about limerence were learned AFTER this, as was other supporting detail. I read a massive amount of books on every topic, and always have. About 1% of it is related to attraction, dating and relationships. When I come across something that explains something I have learned through experience, I bookmark it. I take notes and use stickies on every nonfiction thing I read, even magazine articles, then go back and make computerized notes. If you aren't doing this when you read, in this age of information overload, you are losing lots of knowledge and the resulting wisdom.

 

If I had to distill the long post on seduction, here are some high points.

 

1. Approach your dating life like any other skill, practice it and standardize it. When you find women who fall head over heels for you quickly (on first meeting or soon after), it may be because they are unstable, but it usually is because in addition to their first switch being flipped, finding you attractive enough, you did something or behaved in a certain way, to inspire that "butterfly" "screaming at the Beatles or Elvis" feeling in them, to flip that second switch. If you want success in dating, you have to figure out what you did and how to repeat it.

 

2. Playing into womens' wheelhouse by letting approaches devolve into Q&A sessions, "what do you do," "where do you go to school?" "what do you think about XYZ?" is attraction suicide. In order to get a woman sexually interested reliably and quickly, you must tap into her feelings, you must make an emotional impact on her. Women may not all know what they want in life or from a man, that's natural, but they DO have an agenda and that "list." Just as you try to get in front of the boss instead of the HR dept when getting a new job, with women you must get in front of their emotions, THE BOSS, not the HR dept of their agenda and manipulating men into compliance.

 

3. Attempting to please women, suck up to them, pay crappy compliments, is not reliable, and usually counterproductive. You must develop discernment and discrimination of YOUR OWN, you must let her know that she is on audition every bit as much as you are, even though by making the approach, you are signalling that she already has the job if she wants it. this is TOUGH, the toughest part for men. This is where all the limerence, social value and rarity talk comes in. Not some secret, just adapting your style to truths of basic human nature. The supreme actualization of this is having a woman grab your willy and be able to look at her playfully and say "you can't afford that!" as you move her hand away until YOU choose to let them. You must let them know that they have to earn your continued attention because rest assured, they are evaluating everything you say and do likewise. For goodness sakes it's all over this board from both genders. Once more, learn from what you read.

 

4. Master your sexual desire. When women perceive that you are other than a mere leg humping dog running around, they will literally start to THROW sex at you if you do the things above. This applies to all stages of the relationship. Don't take it every time. They will start to respect you when they see that they can't own you with their sexual power. Turn down sex because you are timid or have a hangup, etc. and they will be gone. Turn down sex from a position of power, because you know you can get it whenever, and they will literally throw it at you. I promise.

 

These things become second nature, ingrained, but sometimes you need training wheels to get the ball rolling, that's what the PUA and other references are for. At the very least, understand the limerence response, it is the key to developing attraction in women.

 

And anyone who has a better plan or methods, please post them, there is likely something I can learn from you. Don't just diss on my experience, post yours.

[zengirl]

dasein, that is PUA stuff, because it's only useful for hookups, if at all. I don't know if it works in such shallow ways as hookps, but manipulating a situation NEVER helps you build a meaningful relationship and connection with another human being because it means you aren't actually connecting and it's all built on a lie.

 

I think betterdeal has it right about 'real men' if anyone does, or for that matter, real people.

 

Real men couldn't give a lemon scented f*ck what anyone thinks makes a real man

 

Though I'd add to that that it's not "don't give a f*ck" in an act like a jerkwad way but in an, "I'm who I am and proud of it," way while still being a kind, compassionate individual. (This can go for women and men of quality, really.)

 

I think the reason American Life said it appears pretty obsessive is, it's not the kind of thing that should have a clearcut How To if you're talking about how to actually make a connection with another human being. Human beings are not like loads of laundry---they are more unique and interesting than that. Now, if you're offering advice for how to bang as many gals as you can, maybe that's sound; after all, in order to do that, you would have to objectify the people and de-sensitize yourself to their personhood (same if a gal's objective is to bang as many guys as possible; that's not a gender thing). But a deep connection, finding love, is WAY more ineffable than that.

 

I imagine you'll chalk that idea up to my being irrational, but I've never met a man who was rational either when it came to love. Nobody is. If you try to break it down rationally and create some kind of system, you take yourself out of the moment, you strip away the magic, and you keep yourself from really connecting on that deep level. Great way to not be vulnerable, sure, but also a great way to keep yourself away from the best stuff. YMMV.

[betterdeal]

If someone has a problem with the way I am, that's their problem, not mine.

 

I was watching a chat show last night. One with a very camp gay host and one of his guests was David Walliams - a comedian who swam the Thames (120 miles) for charity. He came on to the set in just a pair of Speedos greased up with lanolin oil. Joking around with the host, he said said "I change sexuality when I'm drunk" and they cavorted and flirted and messed about.

 

He's actually married, happy and quite camp in some respects. He just doesn't see sex as sinful and certainly not what defines him. Real men (and women) come in all shapes and sizes, and what makes them real is being themselves, being comfortable in their own skin, and not letting people bully them. If someone is unfriendly, nasty, snide, that's their problem, not mine.

[Mrlonelyone]

Well you can't give him all the credit. I have been presenting that perspective here for a few days.

 

It's like we have two brains. One that only thinks about immediate survival pleasure and pains...and nothing more. Then the other that thinks about emotions and consequences. If women thought as much with their survival brain, their reptile brain as men do ... they would see things as men do.

 

Surprise, some people didn't understand dasein's post. What he's done is no less than elucidate the mechanisms of female sexual arousal and WHY these specific techniques stimulate them. In everyday reality, most of these behaviours are perfectly ordinary and familiar parts of succesfully managing the affections of a woman -'flirting', 'playing hard to get', 'treat em mean keep em keen' and other truisms all men understand in terms of application, without knowing the basis underpinning their effectiveness.

 

What was newer and more interesting to me was pushing the scope of explanation back a level, to draw on and link to the evolutionary imperative for a woman to ascertain the compliance/manipulation dynamic of a prospective mate, as she would any other tool to achieve a specific outcome. Seems to me he's nailed it. In many ways, the entire, apparently inscrutable female mate selection process can be described and understood under this concept of 'toolworthiness'. I genuinely thought that was one of the finest posts I've ever read on this site.

[Mme. Chaucer]

Well you can't give him all the credit. I have been presenting that perspective here for a few days.

 

Good. I think this makes 4 of you who think any "credit" is due for this effort.

[Mrlonelyone]

Good. I think this makes 4 of you who think any "credit" is due for this effort.

 

Yes at least 4 people who understand triune brain theory's value and the fact that not everything people do is a concious choice.

 

Don't read this too long mme since as you say NOTHING you do is controlled by your r-Complex.... You need to think to keep your heart beating, your lungs breathing, and never feel emotions such as jealousy anger and horniness or evolutionarily supeiror one.

 

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

[dasein]

it's only useful for hookups, if at all. I don't know if it works in such shallow ways as hookps, but manipulating a situation NEVER helps you build a meaningful relationship and connection with another human being because it means you aren't actually connecting and it's all built on a lie.

 

You couldn't be more 180 degrees wrong about it being only good for hookups. One thing I haven't mentioned yet is that much of what I posted applies to many dealings with people generally, family, friends, clients, prospective employers, not just romance. People are constantly manipulated and constantly manipulating. Every interaction with a human being includes manipulative elements. Negotiations with family and friends, job interviews, etc. So long as it's benevolent and not malevolent manipulation, we call it "negotiation," "Getting to Yes," "How to Win Friends and Influence People," "Think and Grow Rich." There's no line in the sand between PUA techniques and general self-help advice about getting what you want in life, despite your thinking there is. It's mostly the same exact stuff. You don't "like" what the PUA stuff implies about certain uniformities in female response, so you differentiate it from other kinds of manipulation we engage in every day.

 

A man who understands the "butterfly" response that women state they thrive on has power, not just in attraction, but in maintaining a woman's interest over the long haul and in bettering his relationships with all people.

 

I think betterdeal has it right about 'real men' if anyone does, or for that matter, real people.

 

I don't disagree, it's a pithy aphorism, but of no real use to the men who are having problems here. "Be confident, don't care too much," great advice, they've heard if before though, and without specifics, it's useless.

 

Human beings are not like loads of laundry

 

Gross mischaracterization of the actual words I typed and the obvious intent of those words. But whatever, every process you engage in in life, is done according to either a structured ruleset, such as the rules of chess, or a moderately fluid ruleset, such as mowing the lawn, or a very mildly structured heuristic ruleset, such as catching a frisbee. You can decide to put the toothpaste on the brush after brushing your teeth of course, which is the equivalent of how many men who lose out approach attracting women. Though the individual variations are infinite, the commonalities are pronounced, and until you have actually sat across the table from 200 or so female first dates in your life, and experienced the ways in which women tend to be the same and different, your opinion as to the degree of uniformity in female response is uninformed.

 

All I'm saying is to identify what works and repeat it, not that "my way" always works. It is how we learn how to repeat successes in every endeavor, and one of the fatal flaws I see unsuccessful men making here. Sexual success is like any other learned skill, telling good jokes, learning a language, and yes doing laundry.

[Anela]

Yes at least 4 people who understand triune brain theory's value and the fact that not everything people do is a concious choice.

 

Don't read this too long mme since as you say NOTHING you do is controlled by your r-Complex.... You need to think to keep your heart beating, your lungs breathing, and never feel emotions such as jealousy anger and horniness or evolutionarily supeiror one.

 

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

 

I thought you had Mme. Chaucer on "ignore"?

 

What is your problem?

[TheBigQuestion]

dasein, that is PUA stuff, because it's only useful for hookups, if at all. I don't know if it works in such shallow ways as hookps, but manipulating a situation NEVER helps you build a meaningful relationship and connection with another human being because it means you aren't actually connecting and it's all built on a lie.

 

I think betterdeal has it right about 'real men' if anyone does, or for that matter, real people.

 

 

 

Though I'd add to that that it's not "don't give a f*ck" in an act like a jerkwad way but in an, "I'm who I am and proud of it," way while still being a kind, compassionate individual. (This can go for women and men of quality, really.)

 

I think the reason American Life said it appears pretty obsessive is, it's not the kind of thing that should have a clearcut How To if you're talking about how to actually make a connection with another human being. Human beings are not like loads of laundry---they are more unique and interesting than that. Now, if you're offering advice for how to bang as many gals as you can, maybe that's sound; after all, in order to do that, you would have to objectify the people and de-sensitize yourself to their personhood (same if a gal's objective is to bang as many guys as possible; that's not a gender thing). But a deep connection, finding love, is WAY more ineffable than that.

 

I imagine you'll chalk that idea up to my being irrational, but I've never met a man who was rational either when it came to love. Nobody is. If you try to break it down rationally and create some kind of system, you take yourself out of the moment, you strip away the magic, and you keep yourself from really connecting on that deep level. Great way to not be vulnerable, sure, but also a great way to keep yourself away from the best stuff. YMMV.

 

His advice is, like any PUA stuff, quite useful for attracting a broad spectrum of women. Whether one takes it to the level of a relationship is up to the individual. The advice is only a means; the end can be casual or serious.

 

Anytime anyone posts anything along the lines of what dasein wrote, someone mistakenly infers that it's useful only for picking up randoms at bars. I wonder if this is because they don't understand the advice or because insisting that it only works for that scenario serves some kind of psychological need for them.

[Anela]

I don't usually think about things that make someone a "real man," until I notice what men tend to do when they totally flip for a woman. They tend to want to make her happy, want to take care of her, etc.

 

So many here go on about instincts, like the supposed need to spread your seed. The above seems to be instinctual, as well.

[verhrzn]

You couldn't be more 180 degrees wrong about it being only good for hookups. One thing I haven't mentioned yet is that much of what I posted applies to many dealings with people generally, family, friends, clients, prospective employers, not just romance. People are constantly manipulated and constantly manipulating. Every interaction with a human being includes manipulative elements. Negotiations with family and friends, job interviews, etc. So long as it's benevolent and not malevolent manipulation, we call it "negotiation," "Getting to Yes," "How to Win Friends and Influence People," "Think and Grow Rich." There's no line in the sand between PUA techniques and general self-help advice about getting what you want in life, despite your thinking there is. It's mostly the same exact stuff. You don't "like" what the PUA stuff implies about certain uniformities in female response, so you differentiate it from other kinds of manipulation we engage in every day.

 

This makes me... so sad. I've spent my life trying to be authenticate, to always present my thoughts and opinions openly and in a forward fashion. I have done everything possible to avoid manipulation, to deal with people with empathy, kindness, and free of pretext.

 

And it seems I've been doing it wrong all along. Maybe that's why I'm considered socially "strange"... I lack the ability to manipulate the people around me. But geez, what a thing to trade it for popularity.

 

All right, let's flip it around. If manipulation is a constant in human interaction, how can a woman manipulate a man WITHOUT her physical looks coming into play? In other words, is sexual response to beauty the only way to entrance a guy?

[Anela]

The topic that Im raising in this thread is not about women wanting to be treated this or that way, but about women using manipulative shaming tactics to get treated this or that way.

 

Its the use of psychological manipulation that Im focusing on.

 

And what about the shaming from quite a few men on these boards?? And the psychological manipulation, that's justified in order for them to get women into bed?

[Anela]

This makes me... so sad. I've spent my life trying to be authenticate, to always present my thoughts and opinions openly and in a forward fashion. I have done everything possible to avoid manipulation, to deal with people with empathy, kindness, and free of pretext.

 

And it seems I've been doing it wrong all along. Maybe that's why I'm considered socially "strange"... I lack the ability to manipulate the people around me. But geez, what a thing to trade it for popularity.

 

All right, let's flip it around. If manipulation is a constant in human interaction, how can a woman manipulate a man WITHOUT her physical looks coming into play? In other words, is sexual response to beauty the only way to entrance a guy?

 

Same here, sadly.

[FitChick]

No one forces you to do anything. Plenty of men ignore all the OP's "rules." Of course, look at the women they end up with, if they can get any woman.

 

I was going to tell the OP to go live in Saudi Arabia until I realized they follow most of those rules as well.

 

Become a priest.

[Mrlonelyone]

I thought you had Mme. Chaucer on "ignore"?

 

What is your problem?

 

The one fault of the ignore button is if you are not logged in you still see their comments.

 

@fitchick.

 

Yeah its a shame too that we have this arcane rules. Some of these rules come down to us from when our ancestors were nothing but shrew like creatures trying to avoid being eaten by snakes. They make no logical sense for a technological advanced creature like us.

 

s Suppose millions of years from now instead of being advanced god like technological creatures we are like this. Edited November 8, 2011 by Mrlonelyone

[dasein]

This makes me... so sad. I've spent my life trying to be authenticate, to always present my thoughts and opinions openly and in a forward fashion. I have done everything possible to avoid manipulation, to deal with people with empathy, kindness, and free of pretext.

 

And it seems I've been doing it wrong all along. Maybe that's why I'm considered socially "strange"... I lack the ability to manipulate the people around me. But geez, what a thing to trade it for popularity.

 

All right, let's flip it around. If manipulation is a constant in human interaction, how can a woman manipulate a man WITHOUT her physical looks coming into play? In other words, is sexual response to beauty the only way to entrance a guy?

 

Don't be sad, revel in it, what are you mid 20s? I was well past your age when I even began to realize the truth. You post above describes me to a "t." I had women telling me "you are so sincere," "you are so cerebral," etc., and was naive enough to take those things at face value, as compliments. LOL. What a joke, and am able to look back on my mishaps and poor preconceived notions with humor, instead of the confusion and angst I felt then as to why I was constantly getting "outbid" by seemingly lesser men.

 

They were merely "dumber" and hence more methodical than me. They figured out what worked, and simply did it over and over, until it became second nature. I would meet a girl, she would respond favorably, maybe even go out ond a date or two, then toss me over for some dude who had figured out how to flip the switches. I actually believed that it was a simple, direct process of conveying information and receiving it, and if we felt similarly, both our desires would be met, hilarious in its wrongness.

 

SOME people never have to work harder, they get lucky, they are "naturals," what have you. We are not they, so we simply have to think things out a bit more and be willing to alter our behaviors.

 

As far as specific advice for women in your situation, I can only speak to that in a limited fashion, as I have not sat across the table with 200 guys on a first date. What I can say is that if you have raised your general attractiveness so that you can meet that "first switch" in a majority of guys, the rest involves trying to understand the similarities in male response and tailoring your behavior towards eliciting the response you want. Figuring out what works and repeating it. I suspect that men are much more simple than women because we walk around in limerence, uncertainty, much of our lives. That is a problem though, because we are not as prone to manipulation based on "butterflies" as women are. The good news is that if we do display initial attraction, we already have one foot in the door so to speak.

 

I would look at your friends who are successful with men, who are on the same footing as you in terms of general physical attractiveness, and attempt to assess the behaviors they repeat that attract and keep men, and then go from there. Don't "ask" them WATCH them.

 

Underlying all of what I have posted here is an assumption of volume, which involves advice that has been so repeated here on LS that I haven't repeated it. You must be constantly putting yourself in social situations, talking to prospects. That, more than anything I've posted is probably the root of problems here, not cultivating enough prospects and options. It's hard work at first, but becomes easy. Start by making a commitment to meet 2 new people every week. Start with just anyone, everyone knows single people. Until the volume is high enough, and you have done everything you can to raise yourself physically, then the rest of what I posted is not going to help you. Once you do those two things, you may find it's all that is necessary.

Edited November 8, 2011 by dasein

[Mme. Chaucer]

Yes at least 4 people who understand triune brain theory's value and the fact that not everything people do is a concious choice.

 

Yet, we can (if we are basically in possession of our faculties) CHOOSE what we do, and override our impulses / instincts. Yep.

 

Don't read this too long mme since as you say NOTHING you do is controlled by your r-Complex.... You need to think to keep your heart beating, your lungs breathing, and never feel emotions such as jealousy anger and horniness or evolutionarily supeiror one.

 

I won't read it too long because it's not coherent.

 

I have not said that anyone, including myself, does not react with emotions (feelings) to impulses / instincts. I am saying that I don't need to act upon those feelings. That's a choice.

 

You really tend to underestimate the people here on LS, Mrlonelyone. Lots of people here are at least as smart / well read / educated / thoughtful as you are. Your stance of "teaching us a lesson" really does little to earn you any credibility.

[dasein]

Your stance of "teaching us a lesson" really does little to earn you any credibility.

 

I don't agree with your assessment of MrLO's posts, partly because you don't offer any reasoning with your opinion, just a pronouncement of judgment... irony, but very good general advice for ALL posters here.

 

In other words, to the thread topic, "shame, shame on you Mr.LO."

[zengirl]

You couldn't be more 180 degrees wrong about it being only good for hookups. One thing I haven't mentioned yet is that much of what I posted applies to many dealings with people generally, family, friends, clients, prospective employers, not just romance. People are constantly manipulated and constantly manipulating. Every interaction with a human being includes manipulative elements. Negotiations with family and friends, job interviews, etc. So long as it's benevolent and not malevolent manipulation, we call it "negotiation," "Getting to Yes," "How to Win Friends and Influence People," "Think and Grow Rich." There's no line in the sand between PUA techniques and general self-help advice about getting what you want in life, despite your thinking there is. It's mostly the same exact stuff. You don't "like" what the PUA stuff implies about certain uniformities in female response, so you differentiate it from other kinds of manipulation we engage in every day.

 

Right. SHALLOW dealings. PUA has a lot in common with shallow dealings, like closing a deal with a client where your aim is the money, but not much to deal with deep dealings, like actually building a 20 year friendship with someone you know inside and out. It's no coincidence most of our deepest bonds are formed when we feel most vulnerable is my point. I don't "like" all that other stuff (those books) you mention either, as they are tools for people who want to use others as objects to get what they want, whether it be sex or money or a feeling of worth or whatever. My point is they won't get you to a place of meaningful connection with the universe or another human being ---- nothing will, unless you can release the desire to control others and circumstances, which is the exact opposite of what those resources aim to do.

[Metis]

The intellectual problem with PUA's and their antecedents (apart from the fact that their claims are unproven and untestable) is that they fail to appreciate the difference between selfishness and pursuing short-term goals. To them, those two things are one and the same.

[TheBigQuestion]

The intellectual problem with PUA's and their antecedents (apart from the fact that their claims are unproven and untestable) is that they fail to appreciate the difference between selfishness and pursuing short-term goals. To them, those two things are one and the same.

 

The intellectual problem with some of the criticism directed at PUA, aside from the fact that there is quite a diversity of ideology within the movement, is that it's primary function is to help men get their foot in the door with greater amounts of women. To put it another way, for a man to have a decent amount of prospects at any given time (comparable to the amount the average woman has), it usually requires more than just dumb luck or the stars aligning. It requires a certain amount of calculation, or at the very least an understanding of the things that make a majority of the opposite gender tick. Dasein admittedly wrote War and Peace in expressing this idea, but it's definitely true that not nearly that much thought goes into it in practice. PUA has never masqueraded as a replacement for making genuine connections or building long-lasting relationships, although certain people in the community focus quite heavily on the lovey-dovey side of things as well.

[betterdeal]

It's all smoke and mirrors, but if it motivates some to do something different and that works for them, great for them. A friend of mine ran dating training courses. Lots of shy / awkward guys trained under him and lots of them are now happily engaged in long term relationships having broken through the barriers they had, because of his courses.

 

Whatever works for you.

[Metis]

The intellectual problem with some of the criticism directed at PUA, aside from the fact that there is quite a diversity of ideology within the movement, is that it's primary function is to help men get their foot in the door with greater amounts of women. To put it another way, for a man to have a decent amount of prospects at any given time (comparable to the amount the average woman has), it usually requires more than just dumb luck or the stars aligning. It requires a certain amount of calculation, or at the very least an understanding of the things that make a majority of the opposite gender tick. Dasein admittedly wrote War and Peace in expressing this idea, but it's definitely true that not nearly that much thought goes into it in practice. PUA has never masqueraded as a replacement for making genuine connections or building long-lasting relationships, although certain people in the community focus quite heavily on the lovey-dovey side of things as well.

 

BigQuestion: I don't see how the stated goals of the PUA movement is an "intellectual problem" for its critics. I know what the stated goals are. I just have my doubts regarding the efficacy of its methods, particularly for men who are not interested in "prospects" with women in the party scene, drunk off their ass, as opposed to other spheres of life. And while nominally, there is some "variety of ideology" as you put it, ultimately PUA owes its mantra to Ayn Rand, and the idea that every human interaction is a zero sum game; you can't gain anything unless the other party loses, so figuring out "what makes women tick" is essentially trying to figure out how to make women think they are "gaining" while in fact making them "lose". I am not going to argue that treating every interaction as adversarial can never achieve one's goals, depending on what those goals are; but it is a philosophy based on values that are antithetical to having meaningful and truly supportive relationships.