A confirmation from a PUA’s perspective.
Readership: Men; Christian Men;
Length: 4,000 words
Reading Time: 15 minutes
In a previous post, Why is Premarital Sex a Sin? (2020 August 14), we learned how women use sex to assert control over men.
In this post, we’ll look at how Pick Up Artistry plays into the woman’s frame to give her the illusion of superiority that she seeks. As we will see, it is much more complex and nuanced than merely a game for control. In fact, it will be seen that both the man and the woman fail to accurately assess the interaction as one of asserting sexual authority — the cognizant idea of power never even enters the picture! Instead, her desire for preeminence and his cooperation through humility is instead regarded by both as her “influence” on the man, which is then interpreted by her as an affirmation of her ego.
Let’s review the relevant text of an article appearing on Girls Chase: Women Resist Sex When They Feel They Have No Influence (2020 May 13), by Cody Lyans. (Please go to Girls Chase to read the entire piece.) Upon first reading, I got the impression that women have sex because they want to be valued and loved, and they want to make themselves relevant to the man’s life. But after picking this essay apart, I found that this article contains a lot of coded language that glosses over the messiness and transforms the PUAs ethical paradigm into a beautiful piece of work.
First and foremost, I’ll point out that the woman’s “influence” is a code word for a mutual faith-based assertion of her sexual authority over the man. Also a woman’s “motivation” refers to her intrinsic wants and desires. I’ll translate others as we go along.
Women Read Men much better than Men Read Women
In the first half of the article, the author explains three tips about how to draw a woman in and not screw up the escalation.
- Choose location
- Control pacing
- Keep her Heart Trust engaged by posing witty questions and showing humor.
Following these instructions, Lyans explains how to interpret different reactions and offers this insight about how to respond.
Remember, not all women are the same. There’s a spectrum: some women will kick back a lot, others very little, and with both, it is a point of pride, whichever way they swing. To one girl, it may be good to be “less of a hassle,” and to another girl, it is an accomplishment to “be a hassle.”
Both come from the same idea: women want to have influence on a man AND be pursued by him.
Translation: Women are versatile in that they will find different ways to attract sexual attention, establish prominence over a man’s life, and exert leverage, depending on the individual man’s particular weaknesses. Some women do this through feminine wiles, while others find it more effective to use anger and more direct confrontation. Furthermore, women love to lull in the throes of egotistical self-esteem in doing so.
The reason why “women want to have influence on a man AND be pursued by him” is because this is the condition of full engagement for the woman. She wants to feel overwhelmed by her passions, while at the same time not be left completely without volition. IOW, it puts her on the juxtaposed cusp of faith and flesh, and this is what makes her feel loved and wanted — not the man himself. The man is merely an object of her affections, and only has to do what is necessary to maintain this condition of full engagement for the woman. Many women want to see men as fungible in this regard, and chase after the hormonal thrills of the metaphysical connection, but we know this is not done without a cost to the vitality of her soul.
If we think about what kind of man could keep a woman on her toes with this kind of interaction, we’ll realize why many women say they want conflicting traits in a man — sensitive, receptive, tractable, understanding, and yet confident, firm, proactive, and steadfast. If he is thirsty as ħә11, he’ll keep up the pursuit and maintain the connection, but he must also be monogamously faithful so that she can retain faith herself. So women want an obedient sex beggar with a millisecond response to the whiff of Chanel who also has a zenith SMV and can obtain sex at the drop of a thong. As we know, only a tiny fraction of a percentage of men can match all these requirements. The PUA industry is built on the art of faking it (or getting sufficiently close enough through training, experience, and self-development), but systematically avoids following through to its completion in marriage.
And yet, women are clueless about what men truly want…
Women don’t know how to inject influence into a situation and allow a man to pursue them.
Yes, women are persnickety afficionadas about the conflicting traits in men that are attractive to them, but are rather clueless about what is attractive to men – other than the obvious – coquettish threads wrapped tightly around a bounteous display of smooth hide, and of course, sexual favors. Modest, demure approaches in courtship seems to be a lost art of the intersexual dance.
So when they influence a guy who is escalating, there’s a chance that he’ll suddenly stop his pursuit. And if they don’t influence a guy who is pursuing her, then she has no responsibility for what happens and is worthless in her own eyes.
Translation: Men tend to prioritize reaching for the fruit that is most delectable and within easy reach. Logically, women should try to make themselves more delicious and more easily accessible, but this would require her to (1) swallow her pride and make an effort, and (2) relinquish her grasping for control over the interaction. So instead, proud lazy women who want to make themselves relevant to a man have to quickly assess each man’s weakness and find a method to consolidate preeminent sexual authority over his desire (or some other weakness) early in the game. This is why unsuccessful women (who take either approach) are described as “not being able to keep a man”.
Translation: Her sense of “responsibility” is linked to whether she is getting what she wants, not whether she is exercising personal agency nor being obedient to his wishes.
Illicit sex often comes into the Game at this point, because this is the easiest, most direct, and most enjoyable way to attain knowledge of the other person’s innermost soul. Men want to know what she’s made of and whether she would be a good fit for him. Women seek to obtain that knowledge of his heart which would allow her to consolidate power and control over him. OTOH, too much knowledge can kill the passion and desire necessary to draw one in. So this is the delicate dance that women think they have to perform in order to “keep a man”. You would think that marriage would be the optimal solution for women at this point, and therefore should be prioritized early in the game. Yet because of hypergamy, copious options of men, and feminist cultural norms including the widespread acceptance of promiscuity, many women have the notion that marriage only disturbs the Game and “traps” them in a state of soul sucking irrelevancy.
Women use Ego Reward Feedback Mechanisms better than Men do
In short, girls are playing a game of self-worth IN BETWEEN the moments we are pursuing. They OFTEN fail at this balance; otherwise, they would never feel a reward when they “get it right.” It is THIS reward that is more important to them than sex, and even a good relationship with YOU.
Translation: Within this paradigm, a woman’s “self-worth” is dependent on her ego-feedback mechanism and whether she is getting what she wants out of the interaction. The reason women fail at this endeavor is because they are adopting an external locus of control, which they have no control over. Instead, a mature woman should be focusing on conforming to the Biblical archetype of femininity and prioritizing her relationship with the man (e.g. by being respectful and obedient), which is an internal locus of control.
Translation: The “reward” is limbic, not relational as a man would assume. It’s about getting what she wants – attention, validation, Tingles, and perhaps sex if the man is exceedingly high SMV. The problem is that men are not “reward” vending machines, and women cannot treat them as such.
It’s the thundering truth, and something to fully recognize. I think it happens because all humanity is forever running around in life, and it’s only through these small windows where we have perceivable power (in our own eyes) that we can let go of our worries and believe we have EARNED our reward. Or less philosophically, our body will only allow us to reward ourselves if we have done something “just right” and pull off a new level of efficiency or compromise.
See translation of “reward” above. It also applies to the man but with a boulder-heavy emphasis on sex. This paragraph reveals that both PUAs and the women involved are running on feral autopilot, seeking after limbic hind-brain “rewards”. However, and reading between the lines, Lyans is suggesting that a modicum of success in this endeavor can bring a psychological liberation that allows one to transcend the limitations of the flesh.
This goes back to our hunter-gatherer days when a person could run after a deer with a spear but might burn precious energy in the attempt, and fail. So the body shuts down reward centers to stop him chasing, rather than have them on full blast at all times and have him hunt until he dies of exhaustion. In the same vein, girls are playing a game of “catching a provider/protector.”
Just as I wrote earlier, men grasp for easy-squeezy juicy fruit, not Miss Princess Invicta Perfecta. More biological evolutionary psychology offers confirmation of the intelligent caveman mentality.
To be recognized as a provider/protector, a guy needs to get sex from her AND be influenced by her. Her lizard brain tells her that if she has no influence in a relationship, she may not be able to protect her children and they’ll die, thus rendering her procreation efforts useless. If she has influence but receives no sexual excitement, SHE will be apathetic and won’t have sex. So to enjoy sex, she has to command influence and be excited, which to her is a hard task; and to guys, it’s not so easy either.
Translation: A man does not need to get sex to be a provider/protector (e.g. fathers). The reason Lyans is inserting sex into the equation is because sex is the feedback confirmation of his stud status being accepted by her hypergamous filters.
In claiming that he must be “influenced” by her, the PUA is essentially saying that a man must allow the woman some measure of ascendancy, at least long enough to be chosen by her for the perpetuation of his seed (or so it is assumed sans birth control). He’s also suggesting that men are untrustworthy and irresponsible (which is only true for immature and uncommitted men), and so it is only right that the woman should be in control (a wrong conclusion due to the selective premise). He’s also pointing out that the man must remain high SMV and perform well sexually, in order to retain her interest.
Maintaining this balance is a hard task to both men and women because this is not how God intended men and women to interact. The real question is about how men and women can reach the level of maturity that is necessary to be sufficiently obedient to God’s order. How can one become mature without forfeiting one’s soul through trial and error?
In the next section, the author outlines what he perceives to be a solution to his conundrum.
Ego Primacy and the Motivating Power of Desire
ALLOW HER TO JUSTIFY HERSELF AND BE MOTIVATED
So if you’ve ever wondered where this comes from, now you know. It’s simple: pay attention to her NEED to justify herself and her WANT to stay clear of apathy in life. Help her be MOTIVATED. Support her attempts to JUSTIFY herself, but do neither without a price for her to pay.
Translation: “Pay attention to her…” means to recognize her sexual authority in a way that is “rewarding” to her, whether that might be giving her social affirmation, control, pats on her ego, validation, or Tingles if possible. (It’s up to the man to figure that mess out.)
Translation: Recognizing “her NEED to justify herself” means that men should accept, for the most part, whatever she feels like dishing out, and still maintain their devotion and sexual enthusiasm.
Translation: “Her WANT to stay clear of apathy in life” means that the man must never allow her to feel any disappointment or loss of ego satisfaction at any moment. (Wow! Is this even possible?)
Translation: “Supporting” all this means to egg her ego on in a fun, playful manner, and to not behave in any way that would erode her sense of ego-security.
Translation: The “price for her to pay” sounds transactional, but a man with a highly refined game (i.e. a PUA) interprets this as making demands for her to invest in him, and drawing her into his frame. The man’s Attitude of Detachment and Displaying High Value will keep her hypergamous interests in splay. All Game techniques serve to “motivate” her to keep coming back to him for successive steady stroking.
Because without any effort, all motivation and justification are untested, so it isn’t real. So you have to provide realistic feedback and be somewhat genuine as you react to her attempts to inject her influence, or restart your pursuit by getting out of the way.
Translation: “Testing” her “motivation” means to figure out what she wants and needs, and what “works” towards satisfying her desires.
Translation: “Testing” her “justification” means to understand the limits of what she can and cannot accept.
Translation: Her “motivation” and “justification” being “unreal” means that the man has not established any sort of trust in the relationship, and so he cannot be certain about how he can successfully let the woman feel like she has any self-satisficing significance without violating her wants, needs, and expectations.
Overcoming the Chasm between the Ideal and the Real
Women wish you were like a shower faucet, and they could adjust how much hot and cold are in your mix to get the right temperature.
Yes, this is what women wish. But men cannot be easily nor reliably manipulated by a woman over the long haul, especially in marriage. Lyans is suggesting that men should adjust themselves to the woman’s preferred “temperature”. Of course, this requires a vitally functioning feedback loop.
But their wish isn’t always what ought to exist, because without the struggle, there’s no sweetness in the reward. And THIS is at the heart of all transitions from hot and heavy to the bedroom.
In this paragraph, Lyans is lightly touching on a very profound truth that Christian men would do well to recognize – how desire and sexual passion can draw two people into a crucible of suffering leading to refinement and eternal bonding. Establishing Heart-felt Trust is the ticket of admission and must be diligently maintained.
Christian men must move past the common churchian misconceptions of complementarianism and the “servant leader” whitewash, and to engage in the mystical pursuit of Heart Trust with both Christ and the woman in their lives.
Lyans is correct in saying that she must “pay a price”, because this is the only way for her to attain a vested interest in the relationship and establish authentic pair bonding. Christian men who are married (or hope to be) must also recognize the role of fleshly desire in sanctification, and of suffering, her suffering in particular, towards yielding eternally beneficial results in their marriages.
Jesus also spoke of “counting the cost” in Luke 14:28. This passage is often interpreted as forsaking worldly interests, but if we look at this through the Christ:Church::Husband:Wife parallel, the “cost” or the “price” for the woman goes beyond forsaking other men, according to Lyans’ view. It extends to her continual obedience and service to the man. I would have to agree.
I see parallels with scripture at this point, so I’m willing to listen to Lyans’ advice for men.
Girls will reject you not because YOU didn’t do the right thing, but because SHE doesn’t feel SHE did.
Here, Lyans makes a sharp departure from his original assumption that women have an external locus of control. I can only guess he means that a woman’s Feeelz always trumps her external locus of control, and that in spite of having an external locus of control, women insist on carrying the notion that they are in control. I think Lyans is suggesting that men should allow women to retain this sense of control and relationship primacy for the sake of the woman’s own confidence and faith in the relationship, even though the woman’s sense of control is a puerile illusion. And more importantly, if a man happens to break this illusion, then he also breaks her faith in the relationship.
So how do you get her to feel she is doing things right?
Translation: How do you preserve her illusions of autonomy and make her feel like she is in a self-controlled state of ascendancy towards preeminence?
- Provide honest feedback.
- Apply a degree of pressure (not toward sex, but behind WHY you are in pursuit).
- Playfully bridge her mistakes (don’t harp on her mess-ups).
- Encourage her to keep trying to get the balance right rather than quit.
- Be playful and happy underneath it all, no matter what happens.
- And no matter the result, just feel relieved when it is over.
Overall, this list of advice is surprising precisely because it is different from the “dancing monkey” approach we often hear from PUAs. Instead, it is rather similar to what is suggested in 1st Peter 3:7 – living with her in an honorable, patient, and understanding way, except it adds the elements of detachment and teasing/tantalization which serve to amplify the sexual tension. It also emphasizes the importance of maintaining Heart Trust, and it can be adapted to how Women rely on a Man’s Frame for Redemptive Introspection (2021-06-28).
Putting this all together and adding my own speculative theory to it, engaging with a woman patiently and playfully, and maintaining a heart led connection, is the way to let a woman feel like she is comfortably in control. She may be allowed to relish the idea that she is preeminently in control of the relationship, and this sufflates her own enthusiasm, encourages her investment, and contributes to her own satisfaction. But from the man’s perspective, the idea is to maintain a balance between her level of challenge and her level of skill, which allows her to attain a state of Flow* in the interaction. Flow is important for building confidence, faith, and skill. When all this is firmly established, and her faith in the relationship is growing, then the man can begin to exercise more direct demands over her behavior in the relationship. In the best case scenario, feelings of love, humility, and pair bonding would also develop.
* Lyans never mentions Flow, but I can imagine that it is present, and that it may be sufficient to maintain her interest and “motivation”.
All in all, this article confirms everything I wrote in a previous post, Why does Game work? (2019-12-09) – namely that Game is a dynamic interplay of stoking and stroking a steady desire, all while maintaining mutual humility and trust.
Women are well aware of men’s desire, and revel in hedonic joy in the game of leading him around by the nose. But here, Lyans recognizes that men are not very well attuned to the aspect of desire, and he is suggesting that men should be more aware of women’s desire, and feed it just enough to be chosen by her and thus taken in for a ride.
Many of us in the Christian Manosphere have long assumed that Pick Up Artistry is largely a game of behaving like both an enthusiastically obedient “servant leader” and a male sex object in women’s eyes. The obsequious “servant leader” archetype promulgated in churchian circles is similar to the PUA approach, but the male sex object aspect is rejected as being too carnal – which is a complete and utter fail by both worldly and Christian standards. In contrast, Lyans’ article brings out a deeper nuance to the male-female interaction that can be described as the man and the woman having independent spheres of influence which are interrelated by faith and are correlated by maintaining an idealized sense of illusion concerning the respective gender roles. Doing the work of maintaining this illusion insincerely or without a sense of a grander vision of the ideal is what constitutes a “dancing monkey”.
The strength of Lyans’ approach is that it encourages an authentic interaction with the intention of building up Heart Trust, as opposed to a transactional Head Trust type of interaction. This approach is also good in the sense that it recognizes the woman as the weaker vessel and does what is necessary to placate her weaknesses and bolster her faith to continue in the relationship. Achieving a state of Flow, if possible, may be vitally conducive to this end.
The biggest problem with this approach is the degenerate marketplace. For the top 15% of men who are naturally gifted with extremely good genetics and natural charisma, Lyans advice is applicable solely by the fact that the man can easily maintain his appeal to her desire/“motivation”. Lyans’ list of advice is most applicable to these men. For the intermediate 15%, it requires the man to be a sincere “dancing monkey” at all times just to retain her interest but maybe not her “motivation” (i.e. Tingles and sexual interest). Without that grander sense of vision, this can be gruesomely tiresome, and with meager and passionless “motivating” “rewards” for the man (i.e. sex). But if the man’s charisma, confidence, and faith are rather mature, such that he can motivate himself through a vision of the ideal, then the dancing monkey act comes more easily and sincerely, and with better results. For all other men, most of Lyans’ advice (except the last part) utterly fails for the mere fact that they cannot appeal to the woman’s desire/”motivation” (especially in our day and age).
Another problem with this approach is one of immaturity. Men don’t know how to create the magic of indulging a woman’s fantasies, and are also clueless about how to exercise Headship. Women honestly think they should be in full control of both the relationship and the man, as well as their entire lives, and are not content with a man’s artful magic to this end. However, given the opportunity combined with due diligence, there’s always a chance that a man and woman could learn to adjust and grow into a healthier relational structure. The vitality of the connection is the key that will determine whether he and she will be willing to endure the process of refinement and growth.
For men who have an excessively immature woman, and they have a vested interest in preserving the relationship (e.g. shared assets, children, etc.), then perhaps engaging with her on the level of gamemanship and fantasy remains a necessary concession. Previously, I wrote a post On the Spiritual Significance and Social Value of Game (2019-11-03) which explores situations in which this kind of Game may be justifiable or needed as a stopgap to ease through a rough patch.
- Σ Frame: Pick Up Game – Does it serve the needs of Men, or is it for Women? (2017-09-23)
- Σ Frame: Women want Game! (2017-09-30)
- Σ Frame: Why does Game work? (2019-12-09)
- Σ Frame: Only noble born men are qualified to do housework for unicorns (2020-08-24)
- Σ Frame: A Revised Understanding of Game (2020-09-14)
- Σ Frame: Start Small to Build Internal Locus of Control (2021-10-14)