Most people are a lot more likely to show too much vulnerability as opposed to too little, so the advice to appear less vulnerable would seem to be justified
I don’t think that’s true. Openly and directly speaking about one’s desires for example isn’t an easy skill. Many guys are tense because they are afraid to fail or to be rejected and put up a lot of barriers towards genuine intimacy.
It’s also worth noting that you speak about “appearing vulnerable” while I speak about vulnerability.
If a woman touches you, do you tense up or do you relax? If you tense up because you are afraid of intimacy, it’s going to make connection harder. It’s even worse if you engage in physical contact because you read on the internet that you should and then tense up because you are afraid of physical contact.
There are many sources for improving social image and attitude. It’s happens frequently that people who start with PUA start to behave in a way that burns existing social connections.
It’s silly to put a lot of extra effort into things like making your flat extra squeaky clean, when you can pick the low hanging fruit of improvements in your social image and attitude.
I didn’t say “extra squeaky clean” I just said clean. Don’t strawman.
A lot of woman openly state that they judge man by their shoes. Wearing leather shoes instead of sneakers isn’t a high hanging fruit.
But much basic advice is freely available online
Much of that basic advice is given in a way to maximize bootcamp attendence.
Openly and directly speaking about one’s desires for example isn’t an easy skill.
That’s a higher-level skill though. What makes this possible in the first place is having a secure and well-defined “frame”, which is an intended result of pursuing what you call “lower vulnerability”. Perhaps the term “vulnerability” is simply too ambiguous.
If a woman touches you, do you tense up or do you relax? If you tense up because you are afraid of intimacy, it’s going to make connection harder. It’s even worse if you engage in physical contact because you read on the internet that you should and then tense up because you are afraid of physical contact.
You’re right about this pitfall of physical contact; somewhat ironically, this is one thing that can be easily spotted and addressed by an actual PUA coach, while it’s really hard to self-correct on one’s own. You say that PUAs seek to “maximize bootcamp attendance” and this makes their free advice less than trustworthy, but that just doesn’t reflect my experience. There’s quite a bit of annoying commercialism, but overall development of the community largely occurs through free-ranging discussion.
There are many sources for improving social image and attitude.
Sure, but how many of these sources are as clear and (loosely) empirically based? (One of the tenets of PUA is A/B field testing of every innovation: this is the actual underlying reason for their focus on the unforgiving bar- and club-environment. It’s not about making it harder for newcomers and selling more bootcamps—that’s just a convenient side effect.)
I didn’t say “extra squeaky clean” I just said clean. Don’t strawman.
But the former is what people whose flat is already clean are likely to hear when you say the latter—which is why one should reverse all the advice that one hears.
The main point is about sources of advice and not about advising the reader to adopt a specific behavior.
Tucker Max does go into more detail on his podcast.
Even if we go on advice level, the advice is to signal conscientiousness. Not cleaning your dishes for three days and having them pile up in the kitchen signals low conscientiousness.
The difference between clean and “extra squeaky clean” doesn’t signal additional conscientiousness but being neurotic.
The great thing about seeing that you signal conscientiousness towards woman is that developing conscientiousness is useful in general in life. Impressing woman happens a quite good motivator.
Following advice without understanding the reasons behind the advice is seldom optimal. It leads to cargo-culting. Especially for online advice it’s foolish.
In person I can ask a lot of question to understand what someone’s issue happens to be and then give targeted advice. Giving advice is usually not the main goal when I write something on LW. It’s intellectual exchange.
The great thing about seeing that you signal conscientiousness towards woman is that developing conscientiousness is useful in general in life. Impressing woman happens a quite good motivator.
The kind of folks who are going to follow through with this sort of advice in the first place are likely to be more conscientious than average, not less. Given that, signaling conscientiousness is not necessarily good advice—such folks may be better off developing other skills, which are also valuable in other contexts. Saying that you should “impress women” strikes me as the kind of truism that’s common in bad dating advice. There are many ways of being impressive, and knowing which are best for you in any given context is a useful skill to have.
The kind of folks who are going to follow through with this sort of advice in the first place are likely to be more conscientious than average, not less.
Being better than average doesn’t mean that it’s useless to improve on it.
such folks may be better off developing other skills, which are also valuable in other contexts
Developing conscientiousness usually doesn’t stand in the way of developing other skills.
Saying that you should “impress women” strikes me as the kind of truism that’s common in bad dating advice.
I didn’t. Most heterosexual guys already spent energy on “impressing women”, my recommendation is about challenging that energy productively.
Adding two woman to a group of ten males, the behavior of that group changes. They suddenly optimize more for the image they are projecting.
I don’t think that’s true. Openly and directly speaking about one’s desires for example isn’t an easy skill. Many guys are tense because they are afraid to fail or to be rejected and put up a lot of barriers towards genuine intimacy.
It’s also worth noting that you speak about “appearing vulnerable” while I speak about vulnerability.
If a woman touches you, do you tense up or do you relax? If you tense up because you are afraid of intimacy, it’s going to make connection harder. It’s even worse if you engage in physical contact because you read on the internet that you should and then tense up because you are afraid of physical contact.
There are many sources for improving social image and attitude. It’s happens frequently that people who start with PUA start to behave in a way that burns existing social connections.
I didn’t say “extra squeaky clean” I just said clean. Don’t strawman.
A lot of woman openly state that they judge man by their shoes. Wearing leather shoes instead of sneakers isn’t a high hanging fruit.
Much of that basic advice is given in a way to maximize bootcamp attendence.
That’s a higher-level skill though. What makes this possible in the first place is having a secure and well-defined “frame”, which is an intended result of pursuing what you call “lower vulnerability”. Perhaps the term “vulnerability” is simply too ambiguous.
You’re right about this pitfall of physical contact; somewhat ironically, this is one thing that can be easily spotted and addressed by an actual PUA coach, while it’s really hard to self-correct on one’s own. You say that PUAs seek to “maximize bootcamp attendance” and this makes their free advice less than trustworthy, but that just doesn’t reflect my experience. There’s quite a bit of annoying commercialism, but overall development of the community largely occurs through free-ranging discussion.
Sure, but how many of these sources are as clear and (loosely) empirically based? (One of the tenets of PUA is A/B field testing of every innovation: this is the actual underlying reason for their focus on the unforgiving bar- and club-environment. It’s not about making it harder for newcomers and selling more bootcamps—that’s just a convenient side effect.)
But the former is what people whose flat is already clean are likely to hear when you say the latter—which is why one should reverse all the advice that one hears.
The main point is about sources of advice and not about advising the reader to adopt a specific behavior. Tucker Max does go into more detail on his podcast.
Even if we go on advice level, the advice is to signal conscientiousness. Not cleaning your dishes for three days and having them pile up in the kitchen signals low conscientiousness.
The difference between clean and “extra squeaky clean” doesn’t signal additional conscientiousness but being neurotic.
The great thing about seeing that you signal conscientiousness towards woman is that developing conscientiousness is useful in general in life. Impressing woman happens a quite good motivator.
Following advice without understanding the reasons behind the advice is seldom optimal. It leads to cargo-culting. Especially for online advice it’s foolish.
In person I can ask a lot of question to understand what someone’s issue happens to be and then give targeted advice. Giving advice is usually not the main goal when I write something on LW. It’s intellectual exchange.
Also dialectics.
The kind of folks who are going to follow through with this sort of advice in the first place are likely to be more conscientious than average, not less. Given that, signaling conscientiousness is not necessarily good advice—such folks may be better off developing other skills, which are also valuable in other contexts. Saying that you should “impress women” strikes me as the kind of truism that’s common in bad dating advice. There are many ways of being impressive, and knowing which are best for you in any given context is a useful skill to have.
Being better than average doesn’t mean that it’s useless to improve on it.
Developing conscientiousness usually doesn’t stand in the way of developing other skills.
I didn’t. Most heterosexual guys already spent energy on “impressing women”, my recommendation is about challenging that energy productively.
Adding two woman to a group of ten males, the behavior of that group changes. They suddenly optimize more for the image they are projecting.