Say, Sleazy, are you a Racist?

My piece on Vince Kelvin seems to be an evergreen, given how many hits I get for it. Unsurprisingly, though, his homeboys in SoCal weren't so pleased about it. After a few months, I finally have the time to respond to the absurd charge that I am a racist. But let's take on step at a time!

On the Casanova Crew message board, someone started a thread with the title Community Shock Jock Tries tooling CC Vince Kelvin. The charge is that even though "certain jokes about Vince Kelvins appearance are funny!!!" (Thanks!), my statement that he should "Go for women shorter and your own race" didn't find his approval.


Here's the corresponding picture from my post Vince Kelvin, the Joke is on you!:

...and another girl quickly makes up to have a boyfriend. She is wearing flat shoes and his still taller than Vince. (Quick tip: go for girls that have the same skin color and are shorter than you. Easily quadruples your success rate.)

So, this not only shows that I have neither used the word "race", even though it was implied, nor was my statement racist in any way. If you think that I am making a racist statement by saying that if you have a problem getting "a certain kind of girl", then you should look for ones more similar to you, then you are severely brainwashed by political correctness propaganda.

Fact is that your race plays a huge role in how attractive some women will perceive you. I've been told that a white guy only needs to have a pulse to get laid in Japan, for instance. On the other hand, a Mexican immigrant will usually find it more difficult to get laid in Los Angeles than the locals. As a foreigner, you often have a lower social status than the indigenous people, which is even true if you make more money than most because, like when you are an Indian programmer working as a quantitative trader for BAC.

Apart from some exceptions, like white guys in Japan (and even there it can be argued that it is the exception), girls generally look for guys their own race, and they also generally prefer guys to be taller than them. Thus, you really shot yourself in the foot if you, as a short white guy like Vince Kelvin, go after a tall black woman. It really is that simple. Common sense should lead to the same conclusion, because interracial couples are indeed the exception. Of course, if you are Seal or Ice-T, then those rules don't apply. For everyone who doesn't have a lot of money and/or status, which makes you more attractive in general, this won't work so well, though.

Feel free to call me a racist for pointing out the obvious. Alternatively, you can chose to accept reality and increase your odds by going after girls from your own race. Shit, now I've said the R-word...

Single Guys, your Life is NOT at Risk

Seriously, I have yet to come across anyone who makes more bizarre claims than Vin DiCarlo. Of course, an absolute classic is his "Why Working Out is Killing Your Chances with Women." However, he hasn't been lazy. Some time ago, he claimed that your life is at risk if you are a single guy. So, let's have a look at that marketing email:

WARNING: If you're a single male in an
English-speaking country, you're life
is at risk...

Recent studies on single men show a
higher than normal occurrence of cancer,
depression, heart attacks and other
diseases than at ANY OTHER TIME
in the world's history.

Apart from the creative spelling of "you're life", the lack of sources is obvious. Also, the obvious connection, if this were all true, is to ask why single men nowadays get more depressed than single men in earlier times. Couldn't it just be that people in general get more depressed because of increased stress at work and the recent tendency to not only work overtime but to have no real weekend anymore in some professions thanks to the pervasive use of Blackberries?

Why's this? Well, the scientific results
cite different things: From the things
you eat to your lifestyle choices -
like smoking.

However, I have a completely different
explanation, entirely...

This is hilarious, because it shows how those bullshit artists think: "Geez, here is science or maybe just common sense, but instead I'll just make up some shit!"

I THINK BEING SINGLE IS
KILLING YOU BECAUSE
BEING SINGLE SUCKS...

A critical mind can readily establish that not being single is killing you but your lifestyle choices, so this is completely ridiculous. But let's just have a look why being single sucks:

You wake up every morning, pent up
with sexual energy, because you don't
have a woman around to give you a
good release...

So that's all women in Vin DiCarlo's world are good for? Frankly, if you just want sexual release, then masturbation and/or seeing a hooker will do the trick as well.

Your stress builds up and builds up,
because you have no one to vent to,
and no one to share your life with...

...and single guys all over the world sit in their empty rooms, and cry because no one has ever loved them, nor will there ever be someone who loves them. Give me a break!

Being single in Vin DiCarlo's world apparently meansm "being single, having absolutely zero friends, and being too afraid to whack off". Awesome.

You look at women walking by you
every single day on the street, and
you wonder who they're with...

What?

… and then...

… You tell yourself they'd never be
interested in you. You pile stress on
top of stress on top of misery and
sadness.

And ultimately – you end up with
what I call a "Pain Cocktail" that
fucks up your life and makes it
easier for you to catch diseases.

(Studies show depression practically
kills your immune system off, and makes
it easy to catch diseases from damn
near anyone...)

Wow, what a simple world we all live in! I tell you what, Vin DiCarlo, you are at a much higher risk catching diseases if you fuck around like crazy, so a single guy should be much healthier.

THE GOOD NEWS IS:

It doesn't have to be this way!

Because you can have a wife,
a girlfriend or even a one-night
stand... even if... talking to women
PETRIFIES you, right now.

All it requires is sending Vin DiCarlo some grand and he'll take care of all your problems, especially if one of it is not knowing what to do with all your money.

What follows in his marketing email is just a sales pitch for some inane product. But let's continue a more serious discussion: Vin DiCarlo makes some bold assumption about the misery of single guys, but while there are plenty of single guys (with our without women) who are perfectly happy, so are there many guys in relationships who are -- surprise! -- either happy or unhappy. In fact, I have strong reason to believe that the level of unhappiness that comes from a dysfunctional relationship is far worse than a single guy's "misery".

Of course, I don't deny that you can be happy in a relationship. However, the question of happiness is much more related to how much you like yourself. Anything external, be it the latest smartphone (because an expensive ad campaign tells you that you've got to have one) or a girlfriend (because TV shows etc. tell you that it's not normal to have none). Yet, being single, especially when you are a young guy, is fully accepted in all but the most conservative circles.

Why the 90/10 Rule is Nonsense

It’s my lucky day because in addition to bashing BradP one more time, I also get to show you why one of the main teachings of the mainstream seduction industry is completely bogus. In one of his recent marketing emails, BradP defines the 90/10 rule as:

90/10 rule means that you are talking 90% of the time and the girl is talking 10% of the time. If that ratio is occurring early on in your approaches you are doing fine.

I am not specifically targeting BradP now, because this “rule” is one of the main dogmas of Mystery who is one of the founding fathers of the seduction industry. Instead of looking for some algorithm, let’s use some good old common sense and answer me this question: How large would the contribution of a girl who is really interested in you be? Probably at least 50%, and if you have spoken to a few girls in your life, then you also know that it’s easily the case that they just won’t stop talking, which means that you could well be restricted to 10% of the time, not the other way round.

But let’s see how a “pick-up guru” like BradP argues why this nonsensical rule is valid:

If she is talking less than 10% of the time, that’s not good cause it’s like you’re lecturing her. But girls tend to not talk at all sometimes, so you have to ask a question or get her to agree with something just to get her to hold up her 10%.

Let me point something out here: if you are speaking 90% of the time, you are already lecturing her, and even if she gets to speak a quarter of the time, you are still completely dominating the conversation, which is not good in this context.

So, why would she shut up and have to be tricked into contributing her “10%” by trying to make her ask questions and the like?

One reason is of course that she is just not interested in you, but because there is no one else to talk to (yet), she let’s you ramble on because she likes getting male attention. That she is merely using the guy and will quickly drop him once a more attractive one is around is of course implied. On the other hand, some girls are genuinely shy, but even in this case they will want to contribute something. Given that the “90/10” rule is associated with “indirect game”, let’s do some math here:

Speaking 90 % of the time means you talking 9 out of 10 minutes. Viewed on an hourly scale, it means that she has only 6 minutes to contribute something. I think this is a travesty, but the “PUA” who is reeling off his scripted stories probably disagrees. Well, it does’t seem to bother him that he barely ever gets laid either.

If you don’t know about this rule, you might sometimes be feeling like you’re not doing well because the girl isn’t talking much. But that’s not the case.

Yes, it is the case! If she isn’t talking much then she is not interested. Is this so difficult to understand?

How do you know if you’re doing well? She’s still standing there listening. If she doesn’t walk away, chances are you’re doing fine. That is a USEFUL assumption, even if it’s not always true, because it will make you project confidence.

One problem emerges, though: How does our little aspiring “pick-up artist” know that the girl isn’t merely just enduring him? Maybe he just doesn’t care about such trifles. The fact that a guy who waffles on and on doesn’t portray confidence doesn’t seem to make him want to shut up either.

Super Mario Saves the Princess

Here's a hilarious parody of the Super Mario video games. It also pokes fun at traditional dating, so those two minutes of your time should be worth it:



(Thanks to Chicoman for the link!)

Interview in German fanzine AntiEverything

Some weeks ago I mentioned that the fanzine AntiEverything is going to publish a lengthy interview with me. In the meantime, the eighth issue has been released.

On the official blog, a number of retailers are listed. Also, it's possible to order it directly from the publisher. Pages 66 to 74 are filled with said interview as well as a sample chapter of Schmierige Geschichten, the German edition of Sleazy Stories.

Jeez..... BradP's "Updated Phone Game Procedures"

My next book is coming along nicely. Since the text ins currently in the hands of my editor, I thought I'd continue with bashing BradP. But don't worry, you will learn plenty from this post even if you couldn't care less about this character.

In his recent newsletter, BradP gave his opinion on the current state of text game. So, check this out:

IMO the current best move is this-
Have a 20-45 minute text conversation, texting back and forth every 30 seconds or so. Along the way you'll send and receive dozens of texts. It's the new way to get to know each other. Then at the end you go for the day 2.

BradP, you are kidding, right? I really hope you do.

Listen, if she is willing to text with you for "20-45 minutes", then you probably don't know what a green light. Your first text should have been, "Hey, wanna meet up tonight at X?" anyway. What "guru" BradP recommends is a colossal waste of time, and what is worse is that by prolonging the text conversation like this, you are nothing but increasing your chances to lose the girl's interest. So, what do you think of "guru" advice of that caliber? (Maybe he's misleading you on purpose, hoping that after your "text game" doesn't work out, you fork out two grand for a "boot camp".)

Not only will the girl wonder why you are such a fucking pussy and don't dare to just ask her to meet up. Also, the need to write dozens of not completely dull text messages might make girls uncomfortable. In fact, it probably makes you feel uncomfortable too, and there are only so many innuendoes you can come up with before you risk repeating yourself. In fact, many girls are so insecure that they feel being put on the spot after receiving a "witty" text message. But Jane Dull just wants to meet up with you and fuck. Yet, with your barrage of text messages, you only end up confusing her.

Lastly, texting a lot sends out a rather bad signal: namely that you have nothing else to do. And this is indeed true. My phone is on mute basically all day, and I hardly ever check it, because I've got a lot on my plate. Once you leave college behind, this will be the norm for you as well because your job and commuting will occupy most of your time. Then you will think twice if you text some random broad for an hour or just read a chapter in a book you find interesting.

More from BradP:

Also, phone game seems to be DEAD, and the 30 minute text marathon is IN!!

Have you run a marathon yet, BradP?

But there are exceptions. I sat on the phone with a chick for 90 minutes last night. But I had done about 6-7 texts with her during the day.

Oh, really? What about telling her to come over instead?

What was most startling, though, was that there is some truth in the misinformation he provides in his summary:

Also, I think a lot of it is coming down to the following factors- 

1- whether you made a strong impression and got enough attraction when you met her 

2- whether she has a bunch of other dudes already in her rotation 

If you didnt have attraction and she's dating 5 dudes, no technique will work. If she's currently got an opening, and you hit it out of the park on the initial approach, anything will work.

Points of interest are:

1) You don't "get attraction". Either you are attractive to her or not. I know that companies like Love Systems tell otherwise ("you can generate attraction"), but they would be out of business if they dropped the bullshit.

2) In the second statement, BradP insinuates that all girls are sluts and fuck ten guys in parallel. This is not quite true either.

3) I wonder whether BradP thinks his potential customers are complete idiots. In the end, he states that "anything will work" if she is available and finds you attractive. But why on earth would you then waste your time with half an hour of text messages!? It just doesn't make any sense at all.

Rumor has it that BradP wasn't exactly the brightest bulb in the pack at college, and what I read of him only confirms this. He's certainly especially weak when it comes to logical thinking.

Captain Picard agrees too, by the way:

Illuminatus Interviews Aaron Sleazy

Some time ago I have hinted at an upcoming interview Illuminatus from Personal Power Meditation conducted with me. It's long, but it will be worth it, especially if you want to learn more about my meditative practice and my general outlook on life, both of which had a big positive impact on my level of success with women.

This is from the introduction:

I made Sleazy my mentor, paying strict attention to his writings and exchanging emails with him regularly. As a meditation teacher, I became particularly interested in how Sleazy had used meditative methods to create the mindset of clarity and focus which he attributes much of his success to. Thus, instead of focusing on his adventures in seduction (which are already well-documented), in this interview I have chosen to focus on the mental basis of Aaron Sleazy: the man himself, and how he developed the psychological wherewithal to become a master seducer capable of flouting social norms and behaving on his own agenda at will – a feat most men only dream of.

Please go ahead and read Illuminatus's "Interview With Aaron Sleazy"!

Review: "How to Make Girls Chase" by Chase Amante

I have known Chase Amante for many years now. Our paths first crossed on mASF where he called himself Regal. He did not post much, but whenever he shared his knowledge, it was unusually insightful and very thorough as well. Thus, I was excited when I received his first book How to Make Girls Chase.

How to Make Girls Chase belongs to a new breed of books on pick-up that strive to give guys a realistic perspective on seduction, unlike Neil Strauss’s The Game: Penetrating the Secret Society of Pickup Artists or Mystery’s The Mystery Method: How to Get Beautiful Women Into Bed, which both present a contrived model of seduction that is far from easily applicable, and oftentimes quite useless. Of course, the standard defense to this accusation is that Mystery’s “game” was developed to pull girls in the nightclubs of Hollywood. But if this is the case, then his teachings are of questionable merit for anyone who does not life in Los Angeles or wants to go after this particular kind of girl.

On the other hand, Chase Amante has the average guy in mind, no matter where he lives, what he does, or what kind of women he wants. He even goes to great lengths to also addresses the needs of people who seemingly start out below zero. This is not a mocking remark, though. How to Make Girls Chase is a very thorough book, and in its 420 pages it covers issues so detailed and intricate that no other seduction coach has written on them yet. For an experienced seducer, it is easy to take some things as granted, but for men without success, it’s often hard to realize that some of their habits literally drive women away.

Having a wealth of relevant information at your fingertips is great, but the downside is that guys can easily fall into the trap of believing that they have to learn or know everything in this book before they can go out and succeed with women. This is obviously not the case. If you want to get the most out of this book, I therefore recommend that you skim it first to get an overview. If something strikes you as too detailed, then it probably is because it’s an area you don’t have much need to improve on. On the other hand, you will most certainly find that you are lacking in some other areas, and in this case, make at least a note and get back to this section later.

Since every guy who writes on seduction draws from his own experiences (at least the legit ones do, the others just make things up) we pay attention to different aspect. As such, I don’t fully agree with some details — the general direction is definitely alright. To illustrate this, I will cite from the book:

If a woman feels a man is too easy, she will think little of him and his value (if he’s so valuable, why is he so easy to get?). Women will tend to dismiss him, although because they perceive him as too easy for them to get (and thus, lower in value than themselves), they will typically dismiss him in a thoughtful way that seeks to take care of his emotions.

This may be a valid interpretation. In the framework Chase Amante operates in, it is certainly a sensible piece of information, and heeding this advice will make it hard for you to ruin your chances with a woman that is interested in you. However, it is important to keep in mind that this can also be a matter of personal style, and not the only possible approach. Chase’s book shows you a lot of ways to meet women, and unlike the books I have mentioned in the beginning in the review, he does not come across as dogmatic.

But as it is often the case, there are corner cases where generally plausible rules don’t always apply. You certainly won’t shoot yourself in the foot if you stick to the advice of the quote. However, if you live in a metropolis with a vibrant nightlife and no shortage of women, you can play play the game hard and fast. You just don’t have to worry much about losing one girl if the next one you like is just two feet away. I know this is a luxury not everybody has, but in those situations you can comfortable indicate to the woman that you are “easy.” You can communicate that this is her one chance to get with you. She can take it or leave it, and she has to know that you’ll just pick some other girl if she doesn’t want to leave with you. Of course, this is a much more advanced approach to seduction and one not many guys would even dare to pull off. Yet, in the right context you can never be too easy if you want to get laid quickly.

However, given that Chase addresses the beginner to intermediate guy, I really can’t hold it against him that he omits special scenarios. Doing so would arguably just be confusing to the target audience of his book anyway, because you have to have a significant amount of experience in the first place. In general, How to Make Girls Chase does a great job to describe seduction to the layman and will give you a solid foundation. It is an excellent guide, and, even better, it is a very useful companion to go back and read up on various aspects of seduction. Even for an experienced guy it is a joy to go through the book. I felt as if I was comparing notes with Chase, and found out that we agree on a lot of of topics, and on others, we have a slightly different interpretation.

You may not agree with every fine detail if you are an experienced seducer, but this book will at the very least make you aware of some minor aspects of seduction you have not paid much attention to before. Thus, it may help you to refine some parts of your “game”. On the other hand, if you don’t belong to that small group of people, you should go ahead and get How to Make Girls Chase because it will not only give you an excellent foundation. It also has so much content that you will grow with it. As you work through the material, you will learn to reflect on it and put your own experiences into context. Eventually, you will mature as both a seducer — and a man.