~ archived since 2018 ~

How to Tell A Story Like Matthew McConaughey — Classic Charm [VIDEO ESSAY]

anthonyrecenello

June 19, 2017

240 upvotes

/r/seduction

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	How to Tell A Story Like Matthew McConaughey — Classic Charm [VIDEO ESSAY]
Author	anthonyrecenello
Upvotes	240
Comments	52
Date	June 19, 2017 4:22 PM UTC (9 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/seduction
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/seduction/comments/6i7h1s/how_to_tell_a_story_like_matthew_mcconaughey/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/seduction/how-to-tell-a-story-like-matthew-mcconaughey.1429185 https://theredarchive.com/post/1429185

Comments

[–]help_me_will 24 points25 points26 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]anthonyrecenello5 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]adamcatrambone 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]savagesteve_13 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]KINGCOCO 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]jgnapoli860 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]olronk 9 years ago [recovered] (41 children) | Copy Link

[–]anthonyrecenello 8 points9 points10 points 9 years ago (40 children) | Copy Link

[–]olronk 9 years ago [recovered] (39 children) | Copy Link

[–]anthonyrecenello 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (37 children) | Copy Link

[–]olronk 9 years ago [recovered] (35 children) | Copy Link

[–]callmealias 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]olronk 9 years ago [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]callmealias 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]olronk1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Moderatorrecyclablebanthas 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

[–]olronk 9 years ago [recovered] (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]Moderatorrecyclablebanthas 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

__1__

Yea communication is basic human nature though, I think it's really quite different than seduction.

See the contradiction here? You think that seduction, passion, sexual desires, etc., are not basic human nature?

Seduction IS a form of communication, that concerns a very basic aspect of human nature.

__2__

There is a very clear goal in seduction and there are requirements and all that. Communication and socializing is just that, you don't really do it to get anything out of it, you just talk to people.

Seduction involves two people interacting. That is socializing. Rationalize it whatever you want, but this is the basic component. Two people. Communicating.

Also, when you're socializing, there is a clear goal: connecting, relating with other people. This doesn't have to be a deep connection, but it still involves connection on some level.

__3__

Are you saying I'm making excuses not to socialize or to seduce?

To not make moves to "seduce," yeah. But again, we talked about this in circles before. And you're right back to where you started, assuming what you need to, so you don't have to take risks you aren't ready for.

__4__

I mean I speak to people pretty much everyday at work and new people all the time, socializing is one thing but I've never had someone attracted to me to be in a position to seduce anyone before.

Again, we've been over this. Your own confirmation bias limits what you're aware of. You are down on yourself when it comes to seduction, so you basically ignore girls who are into you, convince them to be turned off, and/or reject them. That creates a situation where you are fulfilling/proving your own beliefs that no one has ever been attracted to you.

Which as I said over a month ago, is seriously fucking ridiculous. I've seen fat guys pull. I've seen some ugly dudes pull. And from our conversations, you don't fit these categories. But even if you did...... it wouldn't matter.

[–]olronk 9 years ago [recovered] (19 children) | Copy Link

See the contradiction here? You think that seduction, passion, sexual desires, etc., are not basic human nature?

The only reason why I wouldn't think those things are basic human nature is because not all people really get to experience those things. I mean I think you know that I'm 25 and never really had the opportunity to experience any of that.

But I do agree with you that it could very well be part of human nature and I've just not been able to be a part of it unfortunately.

Seduction involves two people interacting. That is socializing. Rationalize it whatever you want, but this is the basic component. Two people. Communicating. Also, when you're socializing, there is a clear goal: connecting, relating with other people. This doesn't have to be a deep connection, but it still involves connection on some level.

I agree with you 100% on this. The only difference would be that seduction means attraction. And seduction results in someone being interested and all that, so there are prerequisites that need to be met in order for a woman to be attracted to you. Otherwise it's just simply talking to one another.

To not make moves to "seduce," yeah. But again, we talked about this in circles before. And you're right back to where you started, assuming what you need to, so you don't have to take risks you aren't ready for.

I see what you're saying, just to be on the same page you're saying that I make excuses to not seduce? I've never really been in the position to seduce anyone before so it may sound dumb but because I've never been in t hat situation it can be hard for me to be on the same page with you when it comes to seducing people or in this case telling me that I've not make moves to "seduce".

I'm not sure if we talked about this last time but I think you brought up the "risks" before and I'm sure we both agreed that the only 'risks' involved was rejection or a simple no right? I don't think I ever had a problem with that to be honest.

Your own confirmation bias limits what you're aware of. You are down on yourself when it comes to seduction

It's not really that I'm down on myself about seduction, it's that I've never gotten a chance to do it. It's like if someone says you are down on yourself about going into outer space, it's not that you're down on yourself, it's more so that you've never had the chance to do it so you don't know what it's about or whether or not it's for you.

I'm not really "down" or depressed about it. Hell I'd say I'm more confused and curious about it if anything to be totally honest with you.

so you basically ignore girls who are into you, convince them to be turned off, and/or reject them. That creates a situation where you are fulfilling/proving your own beliefs that no one has ever been attracted to you.

I can tell you with 100% certainty that I've never rejected a woman before in my life. I'm not sure where you got to that conclusion but I seriously have never rejected anyone in my life. I can tell you that for sure.

I've seen fat guys pull. I've seen some ugly dudes pull. And from our conversations, you don't fit these categories.

Well I'm not fat-fat anymore but as I stated last time I am still about 16-22lbs over my BMI weight so technically still overweight but I'm working on it. And as for the whole ugly thing I mean I think I mentioned to you last time, don't know if you remember but I'm not very good looking to begin with so what you consider ugly (but still attractive to women) might not be what I look like.

But I do remember talking to you not too long ago so I would like to thank you to responding to people around here who need help. Thanks for that, really.

[–]Moderatorrecyclablebanthas 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

The only reason why I wouldn't think those things are basic human nature is because not all people really get to experience those things.

While you have blocked yourself from interacting/socializing with anyone to pursue your sexual desires, you have certainly socialized with people and I assume you have felt passion or sexual desire before.

And seduction results in someone being interested and all that, so there are prerequisites that need to be met in order for a woman to be attracted to you.

Wrong.

Seduction is a form of communication. Nothing about it assumes attraction.

And it doesn't result in interest. It is a mutual discovery process. A process that you're refusing to join in, because you have decided that it's not for you.

I can tell you with 100% certainty that I've never rejected a woman before in my life.

No. We've discussed this. You don't get to have 100% certainty. The Dunning-Kruger Effect alone prevents you from being able to say that. Unless you want to say that you're omniscient.

And I can arrive at this conclusion because I have seen far too many ugly looking dudes end up with girls, sometimes really beautiful ones. And money wasn't the deciding factor, either. Just random ugly, not rich dudes with confidence.

But I HAVE seen plenty of guys shoot themselves down, many of them talking the whole time about how no one was interested in them, even as they didn't realize they were rejecting girls or turning them away with their attitude.

[–]olronk1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

While you have blocked yourself from interacting/socializing with anyone to pursue your sexual desires, you have certainly socialized with people and I assume you have felt passion or sexual desire before.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here, the sentence is worded weirdly. I haven't really blocked socializing, as I stated I kind of do it everyday for my job and it's a lot of fun to get to know people. But that's different than what you're talking about I assume.

By sexual desire do you mean I've found attractive? Of course, but that doesn't really have to do with this. I've stated before that I obviously have found people attractive but I've never been attractive to others which is the issue.

Wrong. Seduction is a form of communication. Nothing about it assumes attraction. And it doesn't result in interest. It is a mutual discovery process. A process that you're refusing to join in, because you have decided that it's not for you.

Isn't the definition of seduction to attract someone or to entice sex? Or is there a different definition in which it's used here?

If we're talking about communication and not sexual seduction then I have not chosen/decided that it's not for me as I communicate with people everyday. As far as seducing people? I haven't gotten a chance to do that really so I can't speak as to whether or not I can decide if it's "not for me".

No. We've discussed this. You don't get to have 100% certainty. The Dunning-Kruger Effect alone prevents you from being able to say that. Unless you want to say that you're omniscient.

The only reason why I said 100% is because you claimed that I rejected women, when in fact I've never rejected a woman in my life. Just to be clear I assume by rejection you mean that I said "no" to a woman who was attracted to men or interested in my romantically right? If we both have the right definition then no I can actually say I've never rejected a woman before.

And I can arrive at this conclusion because I have seen far too many ugly looking dudes end up with girls, sometimes really beautiful ones. And money wasn't the deciding factor, either. Just random ugly, not rich dudes with confidence.

I mean the definition of ugly that you use seems to be men who you personally think are ugly but are obviously attractive to women because, as you claimed, they ended up with women. What I mean by ugly is men who women do not find attractive, as in women don't find them attractive.

In one of these posts there was a guy who said he was fat and balding or something but he said he had good eyes and a great smile. ie: attractive qualities. So there are men who to other men might seem "ugly" but still have attractive qualities that women like. But there are also men who do not have conventionally attractive qualities and women obviously aren't going to like them so much.

That's kind of what I mean.

[–]recyclablebanthas1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

While you have blocked yourself from interacting/socializing with anyone to pursue your sexual desires, you have certainly socialized with people and I assume you have felt passion or sexual desire before.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here, the sentence is worded weirdly.

You have blocked yourself from interacting with anyone in order to pursue your sexual desires. Meanwhile, you have certainly socialized with people and I assume you have felt passion or sexual desire.

The only difference between you and someone who is seducing others, is that you aren't taking the very simple step of inviting someone to spend time with you. And you're not physically escalating with anyone.

Because you're not ready to yet.

Isn't the definition of seduction to attract someone or to entice sex? Or is there a different definition in which it's used here?

You're hung up on some sort of result here. Seduction is NOT a binary thing. It is a process. Part of that process is interacting with people. Connecting with them.

You do these things already. The part where you're getting hung up, is moving any further in the process.

Just to be clear I assume by rejection you mean that I said "no" to a woman who was attracted to men or interested in my romantically right?

Nope. Not the definition.

You can reject someone without verbally opening your mouth. Let's use an example. If a salesman is walking down the street, is he more likely to approach someone who's smiling, or someone who looks angry or unhappy? They will be more likely to approach the happy person, of course. This is an indirect form of rejection: turning people away before they have the chance to put forward something that can be rejected.

You are pretty much rejecting and turning off all potential interested parties with the attitude you create with your mindset that you have never been found attractive to women. And you're freaking stubborn about this belief.

I mean the definition of ugly that you use seems to be men who you personally think are ugly but are obviously attractive to women because, as you claimed, they ended up with women.

I keep telling you, it's not my own personal opinion. The women who hooked up with these guys told me they thought the guys were ugly, but there was just something about them. That "something" was internal: confidence.

You are really failing to check your biases, man.

[–]olronk1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You have blocked yourself from interacting with anyone in order to pursue your sexual desires. Meanwhile, you have certainly socialized with people and I assume you have felt passion or sexual desire.

To be honest I don't really speak to people with the intention of sexual desire in mind.

Between you and me the thought of some dude going around talking to people about him wanting sex or showing his sexual desire to everyone he meets is a little weird and creepy. I don't think random people on the street really wanna talk to a guy who goes around with that in mind.

Because you're not ready to yet.

I think we both agree on this one, it's really the reason I'm here no? I'm doing my best to learn and study what I should be doing and trying to get an understanding of things I should have learned while I was younger.

You're hung up on some sort of result here. Seduction is NOT a binary thing. It is a process. Part of that process is interacting with people. Connecting with them.

I was under the impression that seduction is what you use for attraction and attracting a woman. That's what this sub is about?

You do these things already. The part where you're getting hung up, is moving any further in the process.

I get the feeling that when you say this you mean psychical escalation? One of the questions I've always had regarding that is what are the rules of touching people without their permission or consent?

Not to be obvious but to my knowledge touching someone without permission or consent is kinda illegal. Unless I'm missing something.

You can reject someone without verbally opening your mouth. Let's use an example. If a salesman is walking down the street, is he more likely to approach someone who's smiling, or someone who looks angry or unhappy? They will be more likely to approach the happy person, of course.

Why would the salesman be rejected by a person not smiling if they didn't say no? Just because a person isn't smiling all the time doesn't mean they're not happy, that's how I see it anyway. Don't really know a lot of people who are always smiling now that I think about it.

You are pretty much rejecting and turning off all potential interested parties with the attitude you create with your mindset that you have never been found attractive to women. And you're freaking stubborn about this belief.

I think I see what you are saying but I don't think I've experienced this before. No one's ever really showed signs of looking for anything else with me like in the salesman example you gave.

It's not that I'm stubborn about it, it's more so the fact that there is proof for one reasoning and zero proof for the other. Right now I'm not really attractive to women so there something that I have to do about it no?

I have two options, pretend that nothing is wrong and assume that I do not need improvement, or figure out what's wrong and improve on myself as a person in hopes of someday being on the same level as other men my age to compete with.

I keep telling you, it's not my own personal opinion. The women who hooked up with these guys told me they thought the guys were ugly, but there was just something about them. That "something" was internal: confidence.

What I don't get when you say this is that you're implying that the women were not attracted to the men but still were attracted to them?

I've never really seen a woman be with a man that she didn't find attractive. To my knowledge women (or people) don't really do that.

How can someone be attracted to a person that they inherently don't find attractive.

In your examples you say the men were ugly but the women found them attractive. So in their definition the man did not look ugly, he had attractive features about him such as the example I gave you of the other dude who said he was fat but had good eyes or a good smile etc. So a person can have unattractive qualities BUT also have attractive qualities about them.

These attractive qualities are most likely what your women friends were talking about, there are guys who do have very attractive qualities that can easily outweigh others. But at the same time there are also men who aren't very good looking and don't have those extra attractive qualities like handsome eyes or smile to counter act what they look like naturally.

I think if I sent you a recent pic of myself you'd probably understand what I'm talking about a bit more when it comes to looks and examples.

[–]recyclablebanthas1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

To be honest I don't really speak to people with the intention of sexual desire in mind.

This is what I'm saying. You are blocking yourself from going further in your socialization. ALL socialization starts off the same. Think of it like a highway. We all start on the same highway: "seduction" is just one particular fork in the highway that you're always choosing not to go down.

But you're still driving down that highway pretty far, if you can socialize with people well enough to have friends and joke around, etc.

Remember, a lot of guys on this forum can't even do this much.

Between you and me the thought of some dude going around talking to people about him wanting sex or showing his sexual desire to everyone he meets is a little weird and creepy. I don't think random people on the street really wanna talk to a guy who goes around with that in mind.

You're describing someone who walks up and tries to skip the opening steps of normal interaction. That IS creepy. It's also not "seduction."

Or if it is, it's poorly executed and tone-deaf.

I think we both agree on this one, it's really the reason I'm here no? I'm doing my best to learn and study what I should be doing and trying to get an understanding of things I should have learned while I was younger.

You're ridiculous.

You already socialize at work and from what you describe, you do this well enough that the only thing you would have to do is ask a girl out and physically escalate during the date at some point.

I was under the impression that seduction is what you use for attraction and attracting a woman.

Use? Wrong.

I keep saying: seduction is a collaborative thing. You don't "use" it. You don't deliberately "attract" a woman. You MEET people. You TALK to them. And sometimes when people meet, they get along.

This is the basis of seduction.

If you can make friends, you can "seduce." The only difference between a friend and a lover or GF, is that someone asks the other person out and makes a move.

That's it.

You do these things already. The part where you're getting hung up, is moving any further in the process.

I get the feeling that when you say this you mean psychical escalation?

Yep. Pretty much. And inviting a girl out to join you to do some sort of activity.

One of the questions I've always had regarding that is what are the rules of touching people without their permission or consent?

Not to be obvious but to my knowledge touching someone without permission or consent is kinda illegal. Unless I'm missing something.

That would be illegal.

But touching people without their consent is not what escalation is. You're assuming some dude walking up and feeling a girl up. Wrong.

Escalation starts when you are in someone's space. Before any touch even starts. Everyone has a space bubble and they react in different ways when someone is near or inside their bubble. Their reactions tell you if they like having you close.
And then there are casual touches that anyone might do that aren't sexual in anyway. Like touching someone's forearm or shoulder maybe while you talk.
Or accidental touches like when you are walking next to someone and accidentally brush up against them, or when legs accidentally touch under the table or something.

Reactions to all these touches, tell you if someone wants you near or likes it when you touch. Just watch people around you and you'll see these things happening all the time.

Why would the salesman be rejected by a person not smiling if they didn't say no? Just because a person isn't smiling all the time doesn't mean they're not happy, that's how I see it anyway. Don't really know a lot of people who are always smiling now that I think about it.

I mean no disrespect, but I have to wonder if you're on the spectrum, because a lot of things are coming off rather difficult for you, and you question a lot of basic things that almost anyone else takes for granted after basic life experiences in childhood and adolescence. Or maybe you're just trolling.

Of course a person will be more likely to approach another person who is happy. Do you think that people would seek out a negative interaction?

All this talk about "someone always smiling," is irrelevant. The scenario is about someone passing by another person. Not someone who is always around them long enough to evaluate how often they are smiling.

What I don't get when you say this is that you're implying that the women were not attracted to the men but still were attracted to them?

You do realize that attractiveness is more than just appearance? This is basic. This is the whole damn point.

You keep insisting that it's ONLY outward appearance. IT'S NOT.

[–]olronk1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You're ridiculous.

Well that's a bit harsh. Man I know that I don't have experience and all that but I don't know if I'd say ridiculous, I mean it when I say I'm learning and studying what I can to better understand. I don't really see what's so ridiculous about that to be honest.

You already socialize at work and from what you describe, you do this well enough that the only thing you would have to do is ask a girl out and physically escalate during the date at some point.

I socialize at work and have people who know me but I'm not sure if that's more of a workplace type thing or actual social life you know? I do talk to a few women but they are either married or are not attracted to me, in which case I will not push that boundary out of respect for them and just overall being uncomfortable.

So I never really met any women who were attracted to me in order to ask out, does that make sense or am I in the wrong?

I keep saying: seduction is a collaborative thing. You don't "use" it. You don't deliberately "attract" a woman. You MEET people. You TALK to them. And sometimes when people meet, they get along.

I see what you mean. But I get a long with pretty much everyone I talk to. It may not be the most critical conversation ever but I try and talk to people and generally be positive no matter who it is.

Getting along with someone is a little bit different then having them be attracted to you though. Making friends is not that hard because there isn't a barrier of entry for attraction, if you're cool then most people will be your friend, no matter how unattractive you are because they don't really have any plans on being any more than friends. Which is perfectly fine, that's why they're called friends right?

But with attraction if a person isn't attracted to you I don't think pushing more than just being friends would be smart. For being anything more than friends there is definitely some expectation that you have to meet in order for that woman to find you attractive and consider you for something more.

And then there are casual touches that anyone might do that aren't sexual in anyway. Like touching someone's forearm or shoulder maybe while you talk.

I assume this is what you meant by escalating. But unless I'm mistaken isn't this illegal too? You're still kinda touching people without their permission or consent? I understand accidental touches because you're not doing in on purpose but purposefully touching someone without consent seems pretty dangerous.

I mean no disrespect, but I have to wonder if you're on the spectrum,

I don't know what you mean by this.

because a lot of things are coming off rather difficult for you, and you question a lot of basic things that almost anyone else takes for granted after basic life experiences in childhood and adolescence. Or maybe you're just trolling.

I believe I've mentioned before that I don't really have any experience with women. So even though you explain these things I have question because I've never done any of it. Even things that you would consider basic I've never done with a woman so I guess I would kindly ask for you to cut me some slack when it comes to this whole seduction thing cause it's not something I've done before.

I'm not trolling, why would I willing admit to being 25 years old with no experience? I'm here to learn and study what I don't know from people who do.

I'm sure most people take women and being intimate/attracting women for granted since adolescence but again, I'm not one of those people.

All this talk about "someone always smiling," is irrelevant. The scenario is about someone passing by another person. Not someone who is always around them long enough to evaluate how often they are smiling.

What you're saying with this is that most people assume that a person is negative if they aren't smiling? Because they aren't around the person enough to know when they would smile and when they wouldn't?

My smile isn't very good and I kinda look creepy doing it so I just smirk or smile without showing teeth, would it be smarter for me to smile with teeth way more to let people know I'm not negative? Because pretty much everyday is a good/productive day for me nowadays but I'm not sure if people would know that by not smiling.

You do realize that attractiveness is more than just appearance? This is basic. This is the whole damn point. You keep insisting that it's ONLY outward appearance. IT'S NOT.

I only say that because I've never seen a woman date a person that they weren't attracted to. So I assumed that in order for someone to like you in that way they have to first find you attractive.

When people say that looks and appearance do not matter at all I usually ask the question that how come women can say a person is attractive by just looking at them or even just looking at a picture of them. They wouldn't even know the person by a picture but they would already be considered attractive?

I always took note of when women could see just a picture of a man and consider him attractive, without knowing anything about him, what he knows, or how he speaks or just who he is didn't really matter apparently.

Judging by that I'd think appearance and being attractive has to count for something big?

[–]recyclablebanthas1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I socialize at work and have people who know me but I'm not sure if that's more of a workplace type thing or actual social life you know?

I told you already. This level of socialization is the early stages.

NO one is sure of whether it's more than that until they take some risks to find out.

I do talk to a few women but they are either married or are not attracted to me, in which case I will not push that boundary out of respect for them and just overall being uncomfortable.

Again, you can have no idea in 90% of cases, whether someone is attracted to you. If you're really lurking so much around here, you KNOW this already. So many guys post asking about whether some girl likes them or whether they are really seeing IOIs.

In every case, the advice is the same: invite a girl out one on one and escalate, or you NEVER find out if she's attracted.

So I never really met any women who were attracted to me in order to ask out, does that make sense or am I in the wrong?

Again, you have it backwards. Like every other guy who posts asking if some girl is attracted, because they want to know that they won't be rejected.

There's no way to know if a girl is attracted, until you do things like invite the girl out and

Getting along with someone is a little bit different then having them be attracted to you though.

Right. And you find out if they're attracted to you, by inviting them out and seeing what happens when you escalate with them.

This is seriously one of the most basic things that comes up weekly here at Seddit. Maybe you've been tuning this out.

And then there are casual touches that anyone might do that aren't sexual in anyway. Like touching someone's forearm or shoulder maybe while you talk.

I assume this is what you meant by escalating. But unless I'm mistaken isn't this illegal too? You're still kinda touching people without their permission or consent? I understand accidental touches because you're not doing in on purpose but purposefully touching someone without consent seems pretty dangerous.

You'll not that I said "that aren't sexual in anyway." Touching people isn't some offense. People tap each other on the shoulder. They touch someone's forearms or shoulder when talking, to emphasize something. And so on.

Not illegal. Not dangerous. What are you talking about? Where did you get these crazy ideas?

I believe I've mentioned before that I don't really have any experience with women.

I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about basic human interactions. You've grown up around people, I assume. Not in the woods. Not raised by wolves.

Growing up around people SHOULD have provided you with experiences that have given you certain context, but you do not appear to have it.

So even though you explain these things I have question because I've never done any of it.

You haven't talked to people? You haven't seen people talk?

Stop making shit so complicated. I'm talking about BASIC things that you have seen in person, and in media like movies or TV shows, all your life.

I'm sure most people take women and being intimate/attracting women for granted since adolescence but again, I'm not one of those people.

This is part of your problem. Somehow you've turned all this into some bullshit, magical, unreachable thing. As if every man except for you was a sex symbol as a kid.

You're screwing yourself over.

What you're saying with this is that most people assume that a person is negative if they aren't smiling?

Nope. Not AT ALL.

I'm saying that, when given a choice, people will prefer to interact with someone who seems like they're in a good mood.

I don't know why you're making this so complicated. "Assuming someone is negative,' is thinking too much. I'm talking about basic human nature, subconscious stuff.

I only say that because I've never seen a woman date a person that they weren't attracted to. So I assumed that in order for someone to like you in that way they have to first find you attractive.

This is nonsense. Anyone will only date people they're attracted to. But the point is, attractiveness is more than physical appearance. So nothing you're saying contradicts anything I've just said.

Internal things can make a "beautiful person" ugly. And as I've mentioned, "ugly" people can attract pretty people, if they're confident.

[–]olronk1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I told you already. This level of socialization is the early stages. NO one is sure of whether it's more than that until they take some risks to find out.

I assume you mean the early stages of seduction?

What would be the risk other than a rejection? As in are there any other risks I'm not aware of?

In every case, the advice is the same: invite a girl out one on one and escalate, or you NEVER find out if she's attracted.

Are you saying there are no indications of it? How would you be able to know who to ask out if there is zero indication of who is attracted to you?

This is seriously one of the most basic things that comes up weekly here at Seddit. Maybe you've been tuning this out.

My question is how would you know who to ask out if there are no indicators of attraction like you said.

People tap each other on the shoulder. They touch someone's forearms or shoulder when talking, to emphasize something. And so on.

Well yes these are done not in a sexual way like you said so I wouldn't think there are indicators of anything more than just a tap on the should to get you attention. I mean anyone can do that it's not necessarily correlated to attraction or anything.

Not illegal. Not dangerous. What are you talking about? Where did you get these crazy ideas?

I mean usually touching a woman without her consent isn't a very smart thing to do. There is a boundary that you should kinda respect and not touch someone without permission just because you want to escalate sexually.

Without a woman's permission or consent doing things like that would get you in a lot of trouble or most likely just make a person feel really uncomfortable and in the worst case, they may feel violated.

It's not so much the touching as it is doing it without permission or consent I feel. I may be wrong but I assume most people would agree with me on that no?

I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about basic human interactions. You've grown up around people, I assume. Not in the woods. Not raised by wolves. Growing up around people SHOULD have provided you with experiences that have given you certain context, but you do not appear to have it.

Well I didn't really grow up around good people, not really a positive environment to put it lightly. I mean I'll just say there is a reason why I worked really hard to cut off all ties with my family because, they're just not good people I'll leave it at that.

So no I don't believe I was raised correctly if that's what you're implying, but believe me that I've done everything in my power to not turn out like most of my family. I do believe I was meant for way more.

You haven't talked to people? You haven't seen people talk?

If you mean conversations then yes I do have that covered I feel.

This is part of your problem. Somehow you've turned all this into some bullshit, magical, unreachable thing. The only reason why it would be considered unreachable is simply because I have not been able to reach it in my life, so that's what I'm working on, trying to reach it.

As if every man except for you was a sex symbol as a kid.

Well I think it's no secret that men start their dating/sex lives in their teen years no? I mean one look at any junior high/high school and you can prove that by seeing young men with girlfriends and whatnot. I'm sure this is widely known/accepted that teens date and begin having sex.

I'm saying that, when given a choice, people will prefer to interact with someone who seems like they're in a good mood.

As I stated earlier I'm pretty much always in a great mood these days. My life has never been better and I work on myself everyday so having each day be productive in it's on way is really rewarding. Also seeing people enjoy the work that I do at my job makes me inherently happy too.

Internal things can make a "beautiful person" ugly. And as I've mentioned, "ugly" people can attract pretty people, if they're confident.

The only counter argument I've ever heard to this is the example of women finding men attractive simply by looking at a picture of them. As in not knowing who they are, what they do, not ever spoken a word to him but he's still considered attractive.

I thought it was interesting because it kinda proved that the internal or 'personality' aspect of who a person is had no correlation as to whether or not a man was considered attractive.

I'd like to hear your take on this because I think it has a very strong message but then again there could be things I'm missing obviously.

[–]recyclablebanthas1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What would be the risk other than a rejection? As in are there any other risks I'm not aware of?

You're kind of looking for things to be worried about, aren't you?

And yeah, I'm pretty much talking about different forms of risk.

In every case, the advice is the same: invite a girl out one on one and escalate, or you NEVER find out if she's attracted.

Are you saying there are no indications of it?

Most of the time, there really aren't any. Life isn't like the movies. 99% of the time, a girl won't show interest until a guy makes moves like inviting her out or escalating on her.

How would you be able to know who to ask out if there is zero indication of who is attracted to you?

See, you're making the common mistake that comes up several times weekly. This is where I tease you and ask if you're really been lurking or whether it's been going in one eye and out the other.

You think, like many other guys, that you need to "establish attraction" before you ask someone out. No. Wrong.

The guiding principle, is, ARE YOU INTERESTED IN HER? If so, then you invite her out. She'll say yes or no. That'll be the first sign you get, in most cases. And even "no" might not mean she's not interested, if she has a good reason.

People tap each other on the shoulder. They touch someone's forearms or shoulder when talking, to emphasize something. And so on.

Well yes these are done not in a sexual way like you said so I wouldn't think there are indicators of anything more than just a tap on the should to get you attention. I mean anyone can do that it's not necessarily correlated to attraction or anything.

Wrong. Even stuff like that will get a reaction from a girl that shows how she feels about you touching her or even just how she feels about you being close to her.

So all your concern about sexual consent or permission is irrelevant. I'm talking about stuff that's not invasive or overtly sexual, but her response to it will tell you if she wants more.

Example: You reach out to touch someone's arm to emphasize something you're saying. They flinch away. Okay. That's an answer. They don't want to be touched by you. Or maybe they do nothing or lean into the touch. Game on. That is permission or consent being shown. And so it goes for any sort of touch or getting into her space bubble.

But yeah, of COURSE touching someone without consent is wrong, illegal, etc. You're supposed to be paying attention as you get into someone's space. So you can pay attention to what their responses are. You're not supposed to just do what ever you want.

I'm not talking about that. I'm talking about basic human interactions. You've grown up around people, I assume.....

Well I didn't really grow up around good people, not really a positive environment to put it lightly.

Just going to stop you right there. I'm not talking about your home life. I'm talking about the fact that you presumably grew up around people. Like you weren't in the woods isolated from civilization.

Right?

The point is that even basic interactions with humans in civilization gives you some perspective, that you seem to be choosing to ignore. You're seeing others around you socialize, and you're refusing to see anything to learn from that.

Well I think it's no secret that men start their dating/sex lives in their teen years no? I mean one look at any junior high/high school and you can prove that by seeing young men with girlfriends and whatnot. I'm sure this is widely known/accepted that teens date and begin having sex.

You keep missing the point. I keep telling you: all we're talking about here is socializing. And the point is that you're already completing steps that could lead to dating and sex, but you're choosing to take the fork in the road off into acquaintance or friendship land.

But in high school, again, as long as you were connecting in some way, even as friends, with people.... they you were getting the kind of experience I was talking about. **When I was high school, I was a worm, but one thing I was good at, was interacting at people in a basic way and making friends with people. I could connect. I was just afraid to push the envelope with girls, like my connection would evaporate if I made moves.

I was missing the point. So are you.

As I stated earlier I'm pretty much always in a great mood these days.

You've gotten way off target/topic here. The point of the whole salesman on the street thing was that mere attitude can turn people away or make it more likely someone will interact with you.

So if you believe that you're not attractive, that won't help.

The only counter argument I've ever heard to this is the example of women finding men attractive simply by looking at a picture of them. As in not knowing who they are, what they do, not ever spoken a word to him but he's still considered attractive.

This is a laughable counter-argument, really. If you think about it. I'm talking about direct in-person interactions. And how attraction in those situations has a bunch of factors.

And you think that looking at a picture is the same thing?

That doesn't prove a thing. The Hot or Not website is not the same thing as talking to a person. You know that. If the world were limited to us looking at pictures and never talking to others, then maybe internal qualities would matter less.

But we live in a world where we talk to people in the real world. And in the real world, superficial appearance is only part of the first impression. Tone of someone's speech. Word choice. Attitude. Etc. It all plays a part.

[–]olronk1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You're kind of looking for things to be worried about, aren't you?

I mean you're talking about all these risks and I'm just wondering if you're talking about like getting in trouble with the police or something. I mean I know that there is a high chance of getting rejected but that's not really a risk considering you're not exactly losing anything or being punished, etc.

I'm just making sure I do know all the risks involved because keep in mind I've never done this before so there very well could be many things I'm overlooking.

Most of the time, there really aren't any. Life isn't like the movies. 99% of the time, a girl won't show interest until a guy makes moves like inviting her out or escalating on her.

Well I've seen women call other men good looking or handsome, I've even seen women look at pictures of men and consider them attractive so I'm not sure if it's really 99% of the time.

You think, like many other guys, that you need to "establish attraction" before you ask someone out. No. Wrong.

So do you just straight ask her to go out without any indication of interest or established relation beforehand? I've heard many times here on seddit that women don't typically say yes to complete strangers without knowing who they are unless they're considerably good looking to balance it out.

But yeah, of COURSE touching someone without consent is wrong, illegal, etc. You're supposed to be paying attention as you get into someone's space. So you can pay attention to what their responses are. You're not supposed to just do what ever you want.

I'm gonna be totally honest with you, I'm not really understand the "touch her" without permission but not without consent part.

Example: You reach out to touch someone's arm to emphasize something you're saying.

I mean right there in this example would be touching someone without their consent no?

The point is that even basic interactions with humans in civilization gives you some perspective, that you seem to be choosing to ignore. You're seeing others around you socialize, and you're refusing to see anything to learn from that.

If by socializing you mean speaking to people and getting to know them then yes I am capable of doing those things easily. That's what we mean by basic human interactions. But that's with everyone, not necessarily just women. So I don't think that's my problem.

When I was high school, I was a worm, but one thing I was good at, was interacting at people in a basic way and making friends with people. I could connect. I was just afraid to push the envelope with girls, like my connection would evaporate if I made moves.

To be honestly I didn't really have an opportunity to talk to girls in high school, I didn't have many friends and the ones that I did either moved to another school or would just be acquaintances, as in people I talk to for a few days but not really stayed friend you know?

So if you believe that you're not attractive, that won't help.

Well at the moment I'm about 15-20lbs overweight so I don't think women would consider overweight men attractive you know? It's all things that I'm working on because of that so it's not really that I'm calling myself unattractive but that women aren't really attracted to me so there must be things about me that are considered NOT attractive right?

I'm talking about direct in-person interactions. And how attraction in those situations has a bunch of factors.

In the example I gave women considered those men attractive without in-person interaction, the argument that I found here is more like, how much does in-person interaction really factor in when those men are considered attractive by women with just a picture?

But we live in a world where we talk to people in the real world. And in the real world, superficial appearance is only part of the first impression. Tone of someone's speech. Word choice. Attitude. Etc. It all plays a part.

If tone and speech, personality, etc all play a part then how would just a picture of a man be enough for a woman to say that they're attracted to him? I know it sounds like I'm arguing but I'm genuinely asking because this seems to be kind of a paradox.

[–]recyclablebanthas1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

__1__

I mean you're talking about all these risks and I'm just wondering if you're talking about like getting in trouble with the police or something.

No.

You are the one who keeps coming back to touch being illegal or the police being involved.

You even acknowledge that there is plenty of legal, safe, non-sexual touches that can take place, which would have zero risk of jail time. Touches that would indeed give you some idea of whether a girl wanted you in her space. So I'm not sure why you keep coming back to this.

When I talk about risks, I've already said I'm talking about rejection, basically. (Obviously, nonconsensual touch would be a problem, but you're already so overly concerned about it, that you're likely going to err on the side of caution, so this shouldn't be an issue for you.

__2__

I'm just making sure I do know all the risks involved because keep in mind I've never done this before so there very well could be many things I'm overlooking.

You're thinking too much. Really. It's good to be considerate, but that's not what you're doing. What you're trying to do is think through EVERY possible scenario and make sure there's NO way anything could go wrong. Actually, if we want to get technical here, the problem is not "thinking" too much, but fear. You are afraid of doing something wrong.

The problem is, your current state of worry is preventing you from doing anything at all. You're taking it too far, and you keep yourself convinced that even non-sexual touches are illegal or something. Look around you more. Look at all the harmless touches that may occur around you. The world is not a place where no one touches. If you insist on your no-touch policy, you're going to give people the impression that you are rejecting them.

__3__

Well I've seen women call other men good looking or handsome, I've even seen women look at pictures of men and consider them attractive so I'm not sure if it's really 99% of the time.

Women looking at pictures. And what happened later when they were around those guys? Hmmmm? Did they also say the exact same words to them in person?

In any case, simply saying someone is good looking, is not terribly common. Most of the time, women talk about those things in private, because they don't want to expose themselves to the guy they're talking about. Which means if any felt that way about you, you'd most likely never hear of it.

__4__

You think, like many other guys, that you need to "establish attraction" before you ask someone out. No. Wrong.

So do you just straight ask her to go out without any indication of interest or established relation beforehand? I've heard many times here on seddit that women don't typically say yes to complete strangers without knowing who they are unless they're considerably good looking to balance it out.

Oops. I meant to say that you don't need to "establish attraction" before talking to someone.

Of course you don't just open by asking someone out. :P :P

I'm gonna be totally honest with you, I'm not really understand the "touch her" without permission but not without consent part.

Example: You reach out to touch someone's arm to emphasize something you're saying.

I mean right there in this example would be touching someone without their consent no?

I guess the point is that there are safe, non-sexual, non-threatening forms of touch that are commonly known, which are widely accepted as okay without permission, as long as the other party pays attention to the feedback given afterwards.

Like it's fine to touch someone's forearm or shoulder when emphasizing a point or getting their attention or whatever, but if they flinch away, they're telling you they don't want to be touched by you or at least, they don't want to be touched right then.

NOT listening or paying attention is the issue, not the touching. And the problem with your worrying, is that it draws your awareness inwards, which limits your ability to pick up on the feedback others will give.

__5__

If by socializing you mean speaking to people and getting to know them then yes I am capable of doing those things easily. That's what we mean by basic human interactions.

Yep.

And NO, I wasn't talking about whether you are capable of talking to people. The point is that the simple act of interacting with ANYONE, man or woman, and being around groups of people, has been presenting you with data on what human interactions look like.

__6__

Well at the moment I'm about 15-20lbs overweight so I don't think women would consider overweight men attractive you know? It's all things that I'm working on because of that so it's not really that I'm calling myself unattractive but that women aren't really attracted to me so there must be things about me that are considered NOT attractive right?

You're not listening to me. I have told you that it's more than outward appearance. One of the biggest players I ever knew, had an overbite, wide set eyes, and a weight problem. And yet you keep insisting that I'm lying. You insist that women being interested in him, magically means that he couldn't have been fat or ugly.

He was. The guy was over 200 lbs. Out of shape former (American) football player. And he was affectionately referred to as a troglodyte by his mutual friends. And even the women who dated him, acknowledged he was no physically attractive. They all said there was something inside him that more than countered his outward appearance.

And the overall issue here is that you seem fixated on the fact that some women won't find you attractive, and deciding that they represent ALL women. The point is that, no matter what you look like, some women will like it and others won't. Stop treating women as if all of them are the same.

__7__

In the example I gave women considered those men attractive without in-person interaction, the argument that I found here is more like, how much does in-person interaction really factor in when those men are considered attractive by women with just a picture?

You're continuing to change the topic. Being considered photogenic in a photo is a completely different thing from being savvy in personal interactions. Being able to look good in a photo doesn't equal the ability to influence people or interact with them well.

If it did, then we'd see every pretty person doing well when they try to break into the acting world.

If tone and speech, personality, etc all play a part then how would just a picture of a man be enough for a woman to say that they're attracted to him? I know it sounds like I'm arguing but I'm genuinely asking because this seems to be kind of a paradox.

People say shit all the time. If they'd never met the person, they can imagine whatever they want for that guy's personality. They can imagine that he's savvy socially. Are you going to tell me that you've never imagined what someone was like in person, based on a picture?

[–]olronk1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You even acknowledge that there is plenty of legal, safe, non-sexual touches that can take place, which would have zero risk of jail time. Touches that would indeed give you some idea of whether a girl wanted you in her space. So I'm not sure why you keep coming back to this.

I'm just trying to make sure that when it comes to touching another person that there is consent and I'm not violating anyone's space, that's all.

When I talk about risks, I've already said I'm talking about rejection, basically. (Obviously, nonconsensual touch would be a problem, but you're already so overly concerned about it, that you're likely going to err on the side of caution, so this shouldn't be an issue for you.

I see what you mean. I mean rejection is a certainty only for the fact that it's impossible for ALL people in the world to like me in a romantic way. So I understand that I will be rejected so it's not that much of a 'risk' as I don't really lose anything.

In terms of touching yes I do see what you mean by risks.

What you're trying to do is think through EVERY possible scenario and make sure there's NO way anything could go wrong. Actually, if we want to get technical here, the problem is not "thinking" too much, but fear. You are afraid of doing something wrong.

Well I mean we're talking about touching someone without consent here. I think I'm ok in at least having some concern for the other person. I'm not really afraid of making someone feel uncomfortable, it's not really fear but just common courtesy for someone else.

Look around you more. Look at all the harmless touches that may occur around you. The world is not a place where no one touches. If you insist on your no-touch policy, you're going to give people the impression that you are rejecting them.

When I see people touching other people they are either loved ones, family, or in a relationship. And obviously those people must already have permission to touch him/her so there isn't really a question of whether or not it's ok to touch in their scenario.

Obviously it is ok to touch people but you need to have consent and permission before doing something like that, I'm not sure if I'm alone on this one because you seem convinced but I'm sure a lot of other people would agree with me that consent and permission are a big part in whether or not you can put your hands on someone that you do not know.

Women looking at pictures. And what happened later when they were around those guys? Hmmmm? Did they also say the exact same words to them in person?

I'm not sure because I think they saw the pics online but the point is that they were already attracted to the person by just seeing the picture so I don't think it would be any different in person given how attraction to them was already established by the picture.

The point is that the simple act of interacting with ANYONE, man or woman, and being around groups of people, has been presenting you with data on what human interactions look like.

Yes I have 'data' on how people interact and that's what I've used to understand what I know so far. But interacting with people is one thing but my primary issue is not being considered attractive by women. As I said talking to someone and understanding them is not really in congruence with whether or not someone is attracted to me obviously because even though I've spoken with people there has never been someone consider me attractive.

So that's why I'm here, to better understand what I can change and what I need to work on.

You insist that women being interested in him, magically means that he couldn't have been fat or ugly.

Objectively someone can be overweight so I believe you when you say he was overweight, but you claim that he was ugly yet women were attracted to him. As I mentioned before I don't think I've ever seen a woman date a man they weren't attracted to. So although he seemed 'ugly' to you he was obviously good looking enough that those women didn't think the same as you.

And the overall issue here is that you seem fixated on the fact that some women won't find you attractive, and deciding that they represent ALL women. The point is that, no matter what you look like, some women will like it and others won't. Stop treating women as if all of them are the same.

Well it's not that "some" women haven't found me attractive, every woman that I've ever spoken with or known have never found me attractive in that way. I'm not just saying that, that's the reason why I'm here is because there is something that I'm missing, things that I need to drastically change and improve on/learn in order to be on the level of other men my age who are considered attractive by women.

I don't think it's a coincidence that I'm 25 and throughout my entire life all women were not attracted to me, I think it's a sign that I need to do something about myself.

I think that amount of women is a large enough sample size to generate at least a moderate conclusion that obviously I'm not considered attractive by women you think?

Being able to look good in a photo doesn't equal the ability to influence people or interact with them well.

So how was a picture of someone able to influence whether or not they were attractive without saying a word or meeting them in person?

If a person already decided that they are attracted to you just by a picture then how would interacting have anything to do with attraction if attraction has already been established long before?

If it did, then we'd see every pretty person doing well when they try to break into the acting world.

Well acting is a completely different thing than what we're talking about here. We're talking about attraction not acting talent.

People say shit all the time. If they'd never met the person, they can imagine whatever they want for that guy's personality. They can imagine that he's savvy socially.

Well if they're already completely attracted to him by seeing a picture what would his personality change if they already consider him attractive?

Are you going to tell me that you've never imagined what someone was like in person, based on a picture?

Of course I have, I think everyone subconsciously imagines what a person is just by looking at them. But I think the huge difference here is that those women already considered him attractive.

If I see a picture of someone & I don't know how they are then how can I be attracted to them? They could be the worst person on earth for all I know, or they could be the best person, but that's the key you never know.

How can I consider them to date, have sex with or be in a relationship with if I do not know who they are, I don't think I could simply go by looks and consider them attractive if I don't know who that person is.

So why would women ignore all that and still consider a man attractive disregarding who he is or what he says? Does it not really matter to them?

[–]recyclablebanthas1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

__1__

I'm just trying to make sure that when it comes to touching another person that there is consent and I'm not violating anyone's space, that's all.

What I'm telling you is, there are three categories of touch here. These are not official or anything, but:

1a.) Safe touches, that are considered casual and safe to try, but which will result in someone showing or telling you that they don't want more. Like shoulder taps, forearm touches, shoulder touches, arm jabs, handshakes, etc.
1b.) Also as important as where you touch, is how long: These should be short touches or pats.
1c.) Even getting into someone's space bubble a little, will lead to them showing if they like that.
2a.) Personal touches: Places that are not places you touch right away. It would be too personal. Places you wouldn't really touch a guy friend, unless everyone was really comfortable in their sexuality, etc. Neck, upper leg, waist, etc. You should NOT be going here unless you've texted out stuff in the first category (1a, 1b, 1c).
2b.) The other aspect that starts getting more personal is how long contact is sustained. Like a handshake that both people hold into, starts turning into holding hands.
3.) Sexual touches: touching tits and ass, crotch, inner thigh, etc. Basically, you shouldn't be going here AT ALL, unless you've tested all previous levels and gotten good feedback, things have escalated past kissing, and the girl is actively going to these places on you first.

__2__

When I see people touching other people they are either loved ones, family, or in a relationship.

You're either ignoring or missing all the Level 1 stuff, I mention above.

__3__

Women looking at pictures. And what happened later when they were around those guys? Hmmmm? Did they also say the exact same words to them in person?

I'm not sure because I think they saw the pics online but the point is that they were already attracted to the person by just seeing the picture so I don't think it would be any different in person given how attraction to them was already established by the picture.

We've gotten SO far off topic.

I was talking about how attraction in person is based on more than appearance. Appearance comes into play, sure. But other things like confidence, style, etc., all factor in, often magnifying or nullifying whatever impact appearance could have had. What if a person was physically attracive, but didn't stand up straight? What if they spoke in an annoying or weak way? What if they were an asshole? You get the point, I would hope.
And your counter argument has been, "Well I saw some women drooling over a picture of a guy WHO WASN'T EVEN THERE, so I think attraction is all or mostly appearance." Your counter example doesn't involve a person who's there. So it's not relevant to this discussion.

__4__

Objectively someone can be overweight so I believe you when you say he was overweight, but you claim that he was ugly yet women were attracted to him. As I mentioned before I don't think I've ever seen a woman date a man they weren't attracted to. So although he seemed 'ugly' to you he was obviously good looking enough that those women didn't think the same as you.

I keep telling you, they, without exception, all said he was UGLY, but "there was just something about him." Meaning something inside. His confidence, style, something. And I totally understood them. He did have a way with people. It didn't matter how he looked, in a way.

**Which comes back to the point which you refuse to consider: attractiveness is more than physical appearance. What's more, internal factors can override physical appearance and make a "pretty/handsome" person unattractive, or make an "ugly" person attractive.

__5__

Well it's not that "some" women haven't found me attractive, every woman that I've ever spoken with or known have never found me attractive in that way.

If you've literally asked them about this, you DO realize that this is unattractive, right? Meaning that you can't ASK this and get an answer that hasn't been tainted.
And as far as women you've simply known, well, you've apparently never ventured to try for any of them, which is as good as rejecting any of them who might have been attracted. You won't ever know if most women are attracted unless you try for it. So you're tainting these results as well.

__6__

I'm not just saying that, that's the reason why I'm here is because there is something that I'm missing, things that I need to drastically change and improve on/learn in order to be on the level of other men my age who are considered attractive by women.

We are discussing the VERY thing you are missing. These beliefs that you insist on defending to me, are what stand in your way.

__7__

I think that amount of women is a large enough sample size to generate at least a moderate conclusion that obviously I'm not considered attractive by women you think?

I think you've had enough evidence to say that your poor attitude isn't attractive. It's impossible to say more until you change your attitude.

__8: Bingo, now we're getting somewhere__

If I see a picture of someone & I don't know how they are then how can I be attracted to them? They could be the worst person on earth for all I know, or they could be the best person, but that's the key you never know. How can I consider them to date, have sex with or be in a relationship with if I do not know who they are, I don't think I could simply go by looks and consider them attractive if I don't know who that person is.

EXACTLY. You hit the nail on the head. This is exactly my point. And what you're saying, applies to the way women think as well.

So why would women ignore all that and still consider a man attractive disregarding who he is or what he says? Does it not really matter to them?

Because they WOULDN'T ignore all that. And things other than attractiveness DO matter to them.

And saying a picture is attractive is not the same as thinking that a person you meet and interact with is attractive.

[–]olronk1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What I'm telling you is, there are three categories of touch here.

This is really interesting to read. I'll want to look these over later so I'll list them down on my notes so far.

The reason is that I don't really understand what you're saying but you laid it out well and have explained so I think I'll read into them and see if I can get a better grip on them. As of right now I'm kinda confused by it and the point of consent/permission when it comes to women so I think I'll just read these for now. Thanks.

You're either ignoring or missing all the Level 1 stuff, I mention above.

I always assumed they were already given proper consent/permission from the person.

I was talking about how attraction in person is based on more than appearance.

If you've literally asked them about this, you DO realize that this is unattractive, right? Meaning that you can't ASK this and get an answer that hasn't been tainted.

I've never asked before.

And as far as women you've simply known, well, you've apparently never ventured to try for any of them, which is as good as rejecting any of them who might have been attracted.

I've never met a woman who ever showed any signs of attraction towards me or knew of such so it's not that I didn't 'venture' but they didn't really like me in that way. And I never rejected a woman before because I've never been in a position to do so.

We are discussing the VERY thing you are missing. These beliefs that you insist on defending to me, are what stand in your way.

It's something that I'm working on, along with all the psychical stuff that other men have that I didn't do when I was younger. I'm mostly about self improvement these days and there is a part of me that hopes that if I keep working on myself and improve who I am maybe I'll be at that level where I can at least go on my first date, I think that would be enough at least to know I experienced it & that I met someone's standards after improving myself.

I think you've had enough evidence to say that your poor attitude isn't attractive. It's impossible to say more until you change your attitude.

Well obviously there are a lot of aspects to me that are unattractive given my lack of experience, and given how I've worked on myself for about 2 years straight now and I'm still not considered attractive by women. Seeing all that made me realize that I was probably worse off than I thought if I can focus on improvement for two years and still see no change in how women like me.

So I have two options here, either stop or keep improving and focusing on making myself better. I choose to keep going because it has given me a better life and has helped me feel better overall.

Because they WOULDN'T ignore all that. And things other than attractiveness DO matter to them.

So why in this example did they still consider the man to be attractive despite not knowing anything about him? Him being attractive as a man was purely based on a appearance at that point, that's what I'm trying to wrap my head around. It didn't matter who he was or what he talks like, etc.

And saying a picture is attractive is not the same as thinking that a person you meet and interact with is attractive.

What would be the difference? Of course given that the picture was congruent to how the guy looks in real life.

[–]olronk1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

What I'm telling you is, there are three categories of touch here.

This is really interesting to read. I'll want to look these over later so I'll list them down on my notes so far.

You're either ignoring or missing all the Level 1 stuff, I mention above.

I always assumed they were already given proper consent/permission from the person.

I was talking about how attraction in person is based on more than appearance.

If you've literally asked them about this, you DO realize that this is unattractive, right? Meaning that you can't ASK this and get an answer that hasn't been tainted.

I've never asked before.

And as far as women you've simply known, well, you've apparently never ventured to try for any of them, which is as good as rejecting any of them who might have been attracted.

We are discussing the VERY thing you are missing. These beliefs that you insist on defending to me, are what stand in your way.

I think you've had enough evidence to say that your poor attitude isn't attractive. It's impossible to say more until you change your attitude.

So I have two options here, either stop or keep improving and focusing on making myself better. I choose to keep going because it has given me a better life and has helped me feel better overall.

Because they WOULDN'T ignore all that. And things other than attractiveness DO matter to them.

And saying a picture is attractive is not the same as thinking that a person you meet and interact with is attractive.

What would be the difference? Of course given that the picture was congruent to how the guy looks in real life.

[–]recyclablebanthas1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

You're either ignoring or missing all the Level 1 stuff, I mention above.

I always assumed they were already given proper consent/permission from the person.

No. No one says, "Hey, is it okay to arm jab you?"

This is all grade school stuff that we all grow up being comfortable with. Usually, anyway.

The truth is, the Level 1 stuff I mentioned, IS kind of how you get the idea that you have permission for more. It's a non-verbal negotiation, based on peoples' reactions to others getting into their space or starting off with those casual, safe touches.

If you've been assuming they already had "consent/permission" etc, well that was incorrect to assume. Such permission at that "level" is given non-verbally in most cases. Unless the guy is clueless, in which case, the girl will spell it out for them.

I've never met a woman who ever showed any signs of attraction towards me or knew of such so it's not that I didn't 'venture' but they didn't really like me in that way.

We're back to the earlier circular argument you had before.

You CAN'T get real signs of attraction until you start inviting a girl out AND testing how comfortable she is with your touch.

So you think they didn't like you. What's almost certain is that you simply didn't try, and they decided you weren't interested. Ironic.

And I never rejected a woman before because I've never been in a position to do so.

Not trying, not asking a girl out, etc., is de facto rejecting. They might not have asked you out, but you still rejected every girl you didn't try for.

Well obviously there are a lot of aspects to me that are unattractive given my lack of experience, and given how I've worked on myself for about 2 years straight now and I'm still not considered attractive by women.

What have you done to "work on yourself" for 2 years? I'm not being sarcastic. I'm asking you earnestly here. What have you improved on?

So why in this example did they still consider the man to be attractive despite not knowing anything about him? Him being attractive as a man was purely based on a appearance at that point, that's what I'm trying to wrap my head around. It didn't matter who he was or what he talks like, etc.

You telling me that you can't understand people looking at a picture and saying, yeah they look good?

Them saying that the picture was attractive, doesn't mean that they suddenly wouldn't consider or be affected by other non-physical attributes. It means they only had access to the physical appearance in the damn picture. And if it were in person, those non-physical attributes would come into play.

There's no inconsistency here. It's probably just you being insecure about them saying something about the guy in the picture. You have to let it go.

[–]olronk1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

If you've been assuming they already had "consent/permission" etc, well that was incorrect to assume. Such permission at that "level" is given non-verbally in most cases. Unless the guy is clueless, in which case, the girl will spell it out for them.

Whenever I get really good poignant information I copy/paste it onto my notes here that I refer to when I need to introspect on what I need to improve on.

This topic of touching and all that is kinda going over my head because I'm sure I'm misunderstanding but I do find it important so I'm logging this for later view because I think I can really learn from this. Right now it's not really clicking.

What have you done to "work on yourself" for 2 years? I'm not being sarcastic. I'm asking you earnestly here. What have you improved on?

Well, it's going to be about 3 years now this coming December.

About 2 years ago I walked away from my family because I didn't like what they were about and the environment they cultivated. Ever since cutting all ties from them I've worked on myself at first by dieting, I lost about 60lbs doing that and just basic walks every other day.

Then I decided to start a strength training program so I joined a gym. Started going once-twice a week and right now I still go to the gym 3 days a week for about 1.5-3hrs at a time doing lifting on two days and cardio/yoga in the day between. That helped me lose about 50 more lbs for a total of about 110lbs that I lost and am no longer obese but still roughly 16-21lbs overweight according to my medical BMI so that's something that I'm tackling and still improving upon.

I quit my office job where I worked at a sign company and took a job offer doing master control work for a TV/Radio station here in Dallas where is was mostly 12hr shifts overnight that nobody wanted to take. I needed the money to support my new life so I did it. Now I work evenings and more into their radio studios to help the jocks and hosts with their guests and board operating/producing. It's not my dream job per se but it's very rewarding and I never really feel like not going into work because I like being there and I like the people there too. But at the same time I do understand that it's not the most exciting thing to work in and definitely not any woman's definition of 'attractive' you know?

I used to live in a pretty bad apartment complex but there were a lot of good people around there, I got along with them mostly because I personally grew up in a really bad neighborhood so I don't really scare to the environment like most do.

But now I live in a condo that I'm hoping to own in about 3 years and after that looking to rent this place out to buffer mortgage payments because obviously my next step is to get into a real home that I've always wanted.

So financially I've done a lot to secure myself, have my necessities while still having money accounted for to use as spending money because, let's be honest, we all like to spend a little cash on completely useless crap right?

That's really it so far, I'm still working on myself and looking for new ways to improve. As I said earlier I started improving myself in order to become more attractive to women but after 2 years now being that I'm still not attractive to women I think I'll keep going to improve my life and not so much looking for that validation or result despite it being my original purpose.

[–]anthonyrecenello 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]olronk 9 years ago [recovered] (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]Doriangray0000 9 years ago* [recovered] (5 children) | Copy Link

Hey, if allow me a word, Olronk, I see by the points you touched that you are smart, that is a interesting perpesctive, it's really as you said: just like explaining a situation or just talking about what you did yesterday, bear with me, perharps storytelling has also to do with your voice and how you hold youself talking, and, I don't know if you will agree, in seduction, there is the 2 level communication, the verbal/nonverbal, words/fisical, to the maximal enticement both need alignment, so if storytelling could be associated with the verbal level it could also be a part of seduction.

Storytelling can be a useful skill, it's like being passionate, in itself it with wasn't supose to be seduction, nonetheless, it is, in my view at least, which could be mistaken, women get attracted by these things, however not a signal of sexual component, it's a part of charm, being magnectic, we all love and respect that, so do women, attraction for them is also in personality.

To the other point, tell me what you think, maybe if storytelling can be magnetic, thus entice, and it's releated not just to the outlook but to the voice, tone, choice of words, it can be done by noncelebrities and have the very same effect (or close), in the video Matthew tells how he learned the storytelling with his brothers and father (none famous).

[–]olronk 9 years ago [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link

perharps storytelling has also to do with your voice and how you hold youself talking

Yes, I mean these are the things that we learn as kids. How to communicate with other people and convey our emotions via body language and tone, etc.

I'm sure everyone remembers taking tests on vocabulary and finding multiple way to form a sentence to make it way more inciting that just simply stating what you did. (using adjectives, metaphors, similes, etc. all grade level stuff)

I mean that's what I use when communicating with people when you want to be a little more descriptive of what you're saying, for example recalling something or telling a story.

Storytelling can be a useful skill, it's like being passionate, in itself it with wasn't supose to be seduction, nonetheless, it is, in my view at least, which could be mistaken, women get attracted by these things, however not a signal of sexual component, it's a part of charm, being magnectic, we all love and respect that, so do women, attraction for them is also in personality.

Storytelling is a useful skill, but it's something that we all learn as children. It isn't some crazy thing that people can't do. It's like boasting about being able to read.

As an example, at my job one of the things I do with new shows is I help produce them. And part of that is telling people who are on the air to be a bit more descriptive and because it's radio they can't actually see you so you have to use your words and be more dynamic with your voice and tone. So I guess your right, it is something that some people may not pay too much attention to, but still it's really something that people can relearn to do in like 5-10 minutes.

To the other point, tell me what you think, maybe if storytelling can be magnetic, thus entice, and it's releated not just to the outlook but to the voice, tone, choice of words

I see what you're saying. This is something that everyone can do but I personally don't think it has anything to do with seduction. I mean part of what I've worked on over the years is my vocabulary and speaking to people in a much clearer voice and being conscious of what I say and how I convey it. Does it help me in communicating with people? Of course and it feels awesome when someone compliments you on being a good speaker and all that but as I've found out it doesn't really correlate to seduction or to what women find attractive.

[–]Doriangray0000 9 years ago [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]olronk1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

seduction is much more in the subcomunication than in anything else combined?

Well when you talk about seduction I think it's important to know what it means first. Seduction is trying to entice a woman romantically to create attraction or make them like you, etc.

So when you think about attraction then you're not longer talking about subconscious things, now you're talking about choices and reality.

People decide who they are attracted to and what they find attractive. If a woman is not attracted to Bob then no amount of 'storytelling' or sub communication is going to change that. She just simply isn't attracted to Bob and that's her decision.

Sub communication is for other, deeper meanings. Not superficial ones like attraction or how someone looks in regards to attraction.

When you sub communicate you're sending a message for something that's not readily apparent, hence the prefix sub.

Attraction and how people look are not things that are hidden or not readily apparent. For example you can show a woman a picture of a man and she can make up her mind right there and then whether or not she's attracted to him. That picture of the man needed zero sub communication to attract her, so that proves that sub communication (story telling) and attraction have no correlation.

So just going by pictures or looks there are men who will attract women without saying a word, proving that this specific form of communication that OP is talking about doesn't correlate to attraction, and in turn, doesn't correlate to seduction.

[–]Doriangray00001 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]olronk1 point 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Seduction is about primal mating process that gave birth to society. It's about getting sexually attracted to someone.

I'm not sure if I'd call sex and mating primal. Eating for example is primal, sex and mating etc is something that not all men are able to do so while is it ubiquitous to most men my age just understand that there are guys who never really get an opportunity to experience that so I wouldn't go as far as to say it's primal or fundamental.

The alfa male and the beta could do the exact same process, but in one look congruent, the other... plain bad.

Well yea, it all depends. An attractive man can really say and do whatever and women find him attractive so they kinda overlook a lot of that. To a person who isn't very attractive it's obviously isn't going to go the same way.

A disheveled, unhygienic, unattractive person isn't going to seduce anyone due to him not being attractive. It doesn't really matter what he says or what sub communication he takes part in. It's not going to change how he looks.

The most boring topic could be made sexual by the tone of voice and how you are saying the word. That's Sub communication.

Anything can be taken into any context, just because you make a topic sexual does not mean that the person you're saying it to will take it that way. I go back to my previous example, an attractive guy talking about something sexual will not be seen as bad, but an unattractive man going around talking sexually to people will most likely be called a creep, etc.

It's all about framing and more importantly, when you're talking about seduction, it's about attraction. Whether or not you're attractive to women makes the world of difference here.

But if you're talking about sub communication. It has no correlation to attraction because as we established no amount of sub communication is magically change the way you look into being attractive to women.

[–]Account_for_pron69 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]anthonyrecenello 9 years ago [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]j4nus_ 7 points8 points9 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]anthonyrecenello0 points 9 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Lead ModeratorThrowawayPUA -2 points-1 points0 points 9 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]bigchipshi 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Lead ModeratorThrowawayPUA 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link