**Reposted from the first Lair, original date: 12/18/03
I found a post on mASF entitled "The aftermath of mASF and her shredded soul." The post was just the right ammount of mellowdramatic to capture my interest, so I decided to check it out. It was put up by a guy called Acolyte and goes as follows:
The aftermath of mASF and her shredded soul. (1 of 17), Read 562 times Conf: >> General
From: arby_acolyte [email protected] Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 03:19 AM
I hurt a girl today. Her heart is shattered into a million pieces.
Because of me. Entirely. And I have no excuse.
Does this feel good? No.
The stuff on this site is powerful. Very little is mentioned here on the emotional effect we're having on our targets - sure, we're creating and amping attraction etc but no thought is given to the resulting ATTACHMENT that our 'targets' begin to feel.
Guys, for the sake of your Karma (if you believe in that kinda thing), use this info wisely. Its not a toy.
I understand how/why she feels as she does and, if she doesn't commit suicide, she'll recover and heed this: She's NOT a psycho, just regular LSE.
Such is the power we have on mASF.
PS. I've taken this girl under my wing and I intend to help her regain her feet. I intend to do what I can to raise her Self-Esteem. Please wish her luck.
peripheral vision is often overrated
The entire post can be found here: http://www.fastseduction.com/discussion/read?119824,8
Now, this post is interesting because I am very much conflicted as to how I feel about it. On one side, I empathise with the guy. On the other hand, I can see where all the posters who are responding to him are coming from.
The thing that is easy to forget on the internet is that these girls are real people. When you read about them in cold words on your computer screen and imagine the generic woman in your head, its easy to be neutral in your assessment of where this guy went wrong and why he shouldn't be feeling the way he does. The thing is, this girl is very real for this Acolyte guy. She's probably someone he slept with, someone he shared something with, and someone he probably connected with on some level. And he ended up breaking her heart. Its funny, because the subculture we exist in with the studying of PUA is not very conducive to looking at women as real people, rather, they become objects of our desires and conquests. An example of this is Ellyn, who I mentioned in the post earlier. I shared a part of my life with that chick, and even though I do talk shit about her, when I was on the phone, the last thing I wanted to do was hurt her feelings, because I could HEAR the genuine emotion in her voice that she was happy to hear from me.
I think that's the crux of the issue there. Emotion is the stongest frame there is, and it overrides all logic. That's one of the reasons chicks are so powerful. They run on emotion, they are able to manifest it faster and more powerfully than most men can think of, and when they do, us men are swept right along into their frame (well, unless you're jlaix, but he's in a league all his own =)
I personally do not think its AFC for him to feel bad that this girl got hurt. But the posters in the thread are right, even if they are a bit crass in their advice. This is a natural chick response to recapture the relationship frame, by guilting the guy into helping her overcome her emotion. If this Acolyte dude persists in trying to help her get over him, she's gonna suck him back into her reality, and eventually hurt him the way she was hurt just to salvage some of her self-esteem. I don't think she'd do it consciously or maliciously, but I do think its very likely to go down that way. So he's damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't, as far as this girl is concerned.
Which brings us to an interesting moral quandary: How do you act with girls, enjoy tehir company, and protect yourself all at the same time? Do you allow yourself to become attacted and run the risk of being manipulated? Or do you keep yourself detached and never really enjoy a substancial relationship?
I prefer to look at pick-up in very Machiavellian terms. If none of you have ever read Machiavelli, I suggest picking up his book "The Prince." Its quite a brilliant book on politics, leadership, and persuasion. (I happen to believe Machiavelli has been reincarnated as Swinggcat, but that's another post all together =) Anyhow, the thing about Machiavelli is that he is completely amoral. His advice is designed to get you results, not make judgements about right or wrong. Whether you use the information for good or evil, that is up to the individual.
In terms of PUA, I rate my success on my happiness at the time. If I'm doing shit with a girl and I'm happy, then I'm successful. If I'm involved with a girl and I'm miserable and paranoid and insecure, I am definitely not doing something right. So I think the trick is to create a reality that is so strong that your happiness exists regardless of who you're with, and you allow the girls you date to take part in that happiness. I base this on Zan's philosophy. Here's a guy who's 9 girlfriends and ex-wife just threw him a lingerie party for his 40th birthday, and they all know each other and do not get catty or jealous. How is this possible? Simple. He never destroys that sense of beauty that is around him. That sense of happiness, that frame that he creates that sucks people in. Its always there, and it diffuses any negativity that exists around him.
The bhuddist believe that to attain enlightenment, you must kill all desire. I think to get good at PUA, and I'm talking master level here, you really do have to kill all desire when it comes to women. But at the same time, you still have to CARE for the women, otherwise you end up hurting them. I guess I'm saying you have to be desire-less but care-full (pun intended).
Its a fine line for sure, and I'm not quite sure how to attain it yet. But its something for me to think about. I hope this rant made some sort of sense. If anyone has any thoughts on this or how to go about doing this, I'd love to hear them.
Posted by Thundercat on 02/04/2004 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Was this article helpful?