~ archived since 2018 ~

Noob question

Justin_Rosenthal · 2016-03-28T17:15:53+00:00

Can we give girls shit tests or is that considered negging?...

Justin_Rosenthal

March 28, 2016

4 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	Noob question
Author	Justin_Rosenthal
Upvotes	4
Comments	18
Date	March 28, 2016 5:15 PM UTC (10 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/seduction
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/seduction/comments/4cb3kh/noob_question/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/seduction/noob-question.1302215 https://theredarchive.com/post/1302215

Comments

[–]Lead ModeratorThrowawayPUA 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[+]CrushHazard -6 points-5 points-4 points 10 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheMinistryOfAwesome 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Not to be too harsh with you, but your point is kind of silly. Original pickup material is not ineffective - if it were it'd probably not have generated the current material. It has simply evolved.

Nothing is misogynistic about calling stuff "shit testing" and "qualifying" they are context-based attributes based on the subject's perspective. If somebody is trying to get you to qualify then it is a shit-test because in the context of the situation, with the goal you're trying to achieve it is an obstacle. Where as "qualifying her" by getting her to validate to you is a technique aimed at sucess.

To be frank your conclusion is ridiculous. Everybody is trying to get the highest value person - sometimes people however don't go for too high value because of their own personal insecurities and settle for what they think they're able to achieve and hold onto. Naturally value changes over time and with circumstance and is a fairly fluid definition.

I'm sure that with a little semantic ninja-ing I could claim that your final conclusion is sexist but there isn't really much of a point.

[–]Sarkorien 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]TheMinistryOfAwesome 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]CrushHazard 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Some men do it too. I'm not denying that.

To me it has less to do with actual psychological differences between men and women and more to do with life experience. Between the ages of 15 and ~21, most men spend years wanting and needing a great deal of sexual validation but not receiving it. They go through an unbearably long period of sexual rejection. Women experience the opposite. Between 15 and ~21, women get more sexual attention and validation than they know what to do with.

This life experience basically leaves men with the impression that sex with hot women is the end-all-be-all greatest possible achievement that life has to offer.

Women on the other hand have probably learned that having sex with a man of extremely high SMV is easy. It's the keeping him around that is the hard part.

See, we (men and women) both want what has eluded us in our sexual history -- what we think of as rare and unattainable. In that way we are the same. It's just that our life experiences dictate differences in what that rare and unattainable thing is.

[–]CrushHazard 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ever pushed buying temperature way too high and just burned a girl out?

Well, I've definitely left girls high and dry -- which is a terrible thing to do, both in the moment and for your reputation. You want to be seen as a man who closes the deal.

But where I think the Goldilocks idea really comes into play is when you have a guy who is really physically attractive and has a lot of stuff going for him, but just doesn't have game. So you would think that he can just lower his standards, but his SMV is still too high for those women. They realize that once he gets his mojo going, he's just going to move up to hotter women. And they're right! You can't fault them for being right.

But if he approaches women who are on his SMV level, they aren't used to having to put in any effort in getting laid, so their conversations will trail off into nothingness and the connection just won't happen.

So he ends up in this weird dead zone where his SMV is too high for the less attractive women, but his game is too weak for the more attractive women.

One strong technique for guys whose SMV is higher than their game is to basically tone down their SMV. Go a bit mainstream with your look, hide the things about you that increase your SMV, be more self-effacing. A lot of really good looking guys (and women) use this to great effect. It kind of tricks the women into thinking that you don't know how much you have going for you.

[–]CrushHazard -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The original pickup material isn't all ineffective. I just said that "a lot of" it is ineffective. I stand by that.

Nothing is misogynistic about calling [what women do] "shit testing"and [what men do] "qualifying"....

I beg to differ. I think that there is a vein of misogyny that runs through a lot of the stuff in The Game. Remember that a great deal of PUA was about making money, and there is no better way to make money off of guys who don't get laid by women than to validate their resentment of those women. You are inevitably going to end up with a lot of situations where your cult members are waiting for the spaceship to come and then it doesn't come (in other words, a lot of the promises that the RSD guys and Mystery make in their pickup schools are not going to come true). At that point, you need to be able to make an excuse why those promises didn't come true, and misogyny is a very convenient one -- too convenient to pass up.

Everyone is trying to get the highest value person.

I disagree. Most men want the highest value person they can find, but most women are looking for someone on their level. There are always exceptions to this rule, but that is the general flow of things.

I could claim that your final conclusion is sexist....

You could. I'm not denying that. But I think it is pretty much common knowledge that women have shorter biological clocks and generally want a father in their childrens' lives. From that you can deduce that they are more interested in a guy who is going to stick around, and from that you can infer that they are looking for a guy who is about on their level. It's not too much of a stretch, and I think it fits pretty neatly into standard difference between the sexes type thinking.

[–]Lead ModeratorThrowawayPUA 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]CrushHazard 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Lead ModeratorThrowawayPUA 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]CrushHazard 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Man is at a bar. Woman approaches and starts flirting with him. She is moderately attractive, but he's not totally into it.

Man accuses her of being too drunk. This is a shit test in every sense of the word. If she takes offense to this question and starts to argue that she isn't drunk, it will just turn him off more. If she responds with something to the effect of "I give better blowjobs when I'm drunk", then that was well-played. The guy will get turned on.

I can remember several instances in my life when I was the seducee rather than the seducer (sometimes even with men trying to seduce me), and the same patterns emerged but with the sexes reversed. It actually helped me a great deal in seeing things from the woman's perspective.

There are some fundamental differences between men and women on a meta level, but for each individual interaction, the relevant factor is who is doing the seducing and who is being seduced -- not gender. Women can seduce women, men can seduce men, women can seduce men and men can seduce women. These all look pretty much the same.

[–]TheMinistryOfAwesome 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Though despite my comments on your first post. I actually think that you're kind of right about men shit-testing too. But to be honest, the idea of shit-testing is kind of subjective base don context, as i previously mentioned.

What it is is a technique to measure the person. Everybody does it. Men and women are different, and within that domain people are different, what is a good answer for one gender might not be the same good answer for the other gender.

I don't think it is really based on the seducer and seducee. Gender matters but within a particular scope. For example, everybody selecting anything whether it be some dinner to eat or a sexual partner or a spouse has to go through a process of evaluation. If a shit-test is a technique for attributing value to a person then, yes, everybody does it but I'd still argue that genders matter - since the technique/attractive qualities/etc. are different.

[–]CrushHazard 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]DownvotesCatposts 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Bigchief96 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Justin_Rosenthal 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Bigchief96 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link