Just fucking go over and tell her you find her attractive. And if you do make eye contact why not try smiling instead, then approach and directly tell her what your interests and intentions are.

_________________
USER HAS BEEN BANNED FOR REPEATEDLY IGNORING MOD WARNINGS AND MULTIPLE RULE VIOLATIONS

Don't worry, I'll find the ad hominem attacks and pro-manipulation retorts to be most amusing too. Bring it on. Moss is also cooler than your gif.

http://www.reactiongifs.us/wp-content/u ... _crowd.gif

To be honest with you mate, I'm all for 'direct' so I'm not even disagreeing with you apart from when you mention that indirect doesn't work. Mode one is direct and I would say true direct is not efficient at all. You're going to meet more girls under the pretense of "let's watch a movie" as opposed to "let's go back for sex?" Which one is direct to you?

Quite frankly, this indirect VS direct has been done to death a decade ago. So you're taking about old shit and reviving old threads just to be controversial. Also, there are more ways to skin a cat. Forcing IOI's is effective and it's not all about cold approach. Who wants to cold approach all their lives? I know I don't. I would rather be a flame than a moth.

Your 1st impression sucks, as soon i saw your user name, I knew your thread was gonna be a copy and paste with a dot.com hint at the end which means you were breaking the forum rules. One of the reasons I like this forum is because a lot of the commercial guys can't be arsed to contribute since their backlinks are not fulfilled.

Look up people like Eddie.F who are also commercial. But they get involved in discussions whatever they may be so they are completely very tolerable. I'm sure they receive quality traffic from their help and THAT is how to add value to the forum. You're currently taking value which is why your thread got locked

Back to direct vs Indirect. I'm willing to bet you're not even truly direct in my opinion. Being truly direct is telling her your actual intention which is to sleep with her. You're probably still talking small talk and other stuff you don't actually care about for "rapport".

"I just saw you and think you're cute, bla bla what do you for fun?" = indirect - do you really care what she does for fun?

"Let's go back to mine for some drinks?" = indirect
"Let's go back to mine for sex?" = direct

The former is universally and evidently more effective. It's just that you guys seem think approaching a girl and complimenting her style is direct. It's not at all. But it's much better than talking about which present to buy your friend. Asking a girl to bang is true direct.

This topic has been done to death so you're really not adding anything revolutionary. You also think this forum is about 'manipulation'. There are always bad eggs but the general ethos around is to be honest with girls and anti routine based. I think you're looking at the advertisements too much and you think that's what we are all about around here. If you stop searching threads on 'direct' you will see that this place majority respectful towards women.

_________________
USER HAS BEEN BANNED FOR REPEATEDLY IGNORING MOD WARNINGS AND MULTIPLE RULE VIOLATIONS

What if I like BBWs and notice the dimples in her ass?
I need to work on a BBW ass dimple opener.

_________________
RSDTyler

Where did I say specifically that Indirect doesn't work? I'll agree that its more effective being Direct though and the girls you get from being that are hotter. There is only one statement of those that is direct, but there is not a single person that would advocate being that crass when you're being direct with a girl. Also you used the word 'pretense', and going under a pretense is manipulative. Therefore it doesn't matter if it is effective or not, its immoral and carries the potential to backfire if you didn't 'sub-communicate' properly.
What's wrong with trying to be controversial. Controversy wakes people up. I also didn't actually say very much, I just contradicted conventional opinion that is found in the PUA 'scene'. How the hell do you 'force' an IOI? She either likes you or she doesn't - I can't be arsed with the hassle of trying to find IOI's when she can be given the option of quite clearly stating her interest or disinterest and given a way to contact you should she change her mind. And if she doesn't then who cares?
I don't run a site. And frankly there are loads of signatures with the individual's personal websites included in them - your problem is I am saying something which contradicts your own and indeed threatens the PUA industry. I don't put dot.com hints - I sub-communicate them.
It wasn't my thread actually, but I supported the sentiments of the person who started it. And who are you to say that what I said wasn't helpful? I offered a different opinion to yours and you couldn't take it. I am not tolerable because I am not tolerant of bullshit and manipulation, which is what a lot of PUA actually is. And what do you mean by 'value' - I've heard the phrase used in regards to the 'PUA' scene and in that context it means some shit to do with high status or whatever. Or are you saying that my posts are worthless? Well, that is your opinion but all I said here was to tell a girl the truth. How is that a bad thing unless you're the kind of person who thinks its a good thing to lie to girls to have your way with them.
Why would I get behind something that I wasn't sincere about and didn't live? I do tell them my intention and that would be to sleep with them. I only do small talk or whatever if I'm not interested in the girl.
So are you advocating being direct or not? I don't just randomly compliment girls, I tell them my intention which is direct. Don't assume I don't know what being direct is when I am arguing my case for it. In fact if anything I'd assume that many people on this forum don't understand what being direct is - how could I be direct if I don't know what it is to be direct? Sounds to me you're now resorting to ad hominem in a desperate attempt to try and discredit me. You are making an assumption about me based on very little information, and you assume I don't know what direct means, which actually I do. I don't 'ask' a girl to bang, I tell her I want to 'bang' (albeit not using that word). If she doesn't want the same thing I'll get over it. At least I haven't wasted half an hour on a girl who wasn't ever going to be interested anyway. She either shares my interests or she doesn't - end of story.
Being 'honest' around girls and 'anti routine based'? I'm sorry mate, but there are tonnes of threads suggesting openers and how to deal with specific situations - how is that anything but a routine? And you yourself just mentioned that getting a girl back to your place to watch a movie is 'effective' as a means of avoiding rejection when it comes to sex. That is manipulative. If a man had approached a woman, either in a night club or on the street, said immediately what his intentions are and why he is talking to her, the ball is in her court whether she wants to have sex or not. The entire basis for your argument is all about manipulation. Close to every single thread on here is all about routines.

All of this shit can be thrown out of the window if a man is direct. If being indirect works for you then fine. I'd sooner get girls by being honest and treating them as adults who can make up their own mind, risking them either saying "No" or getting pissed off. If they get pissed off then that is their problem, not mine. And yes I'm sure many guys here are respectful to women, but so long as they are using underhand techniques, then I'd say they're still not fully there yet. Every single major advocate of direct I have encountered have been very respectful of women, more so than many indirect guys. So long as you are indirect you are being manipulative, plain and simple, even if what you do is effective.

I am also not trying to be 'revolutionary', I'm just disputing something I disagree with which you and others evidently cannot take. You have constructed all of this from one line which contradicted another technique to add to the PUA bag of tricks. If I am interested in a girl I will go over to her and say my interests and intentions and that is it. If its in a club, no staring, no dancing near her, no buying her drinks, no openers, no flirting - just going up and saying what my interests are. There are plenty of arguments which are played out over and over again, doesn't mean we shouldn't have them. If you can't take a difference of opinion, that's your problem, not mine!

Hey DirectMike, it sounds like you're talking about just going up to girls, telling them they you want to bang and then taking them home. Which is fine if that's your thing. But you gotta understand that many guys are different from you. Some guys want to flirt with her, they want to joke with her, they want to learn about her or perhaps learn something from her. My point is, for many guys, how she looks or if she wants your cock is not what they're looking for. Whether it be a ONS or dating or fwb or whatever. For many guys, her looks and the simple fact that she is interested romantically isnt enough for them. Some may call this standards, but I wont even use that word because it may imply that how you (Mike) view sex and dating is below how another guy views things. One of the best things I've read here was by a poster who said for direct vs indirect, if your overall goal is to discover if the girl meets your standards, it doesnt matter whether you were indirect or direct. You can open a girl with a direct opener and let her talk about herself, or you can open her with an opinion opener and joke about some non sensical stuff. As you joke with her, you're still seeing her personality. So why does it matter at the end of the day? Both ways allow you to judge whether she meets your standards, whether it be she's telling you what she does for a living, or she's bantering with you over the jealous gf opener or some bs. You can flirt directly, with the whole "we're going to fuck" vibe, or you can flirt indirectly ie teasing her, push pull vibe. You can touch a girl directly and turn her on, and you can do a stupid palm reading routine and slowly touch her skin seductively and turn her on.

Same way you're telling people not to take direct as meaning crass talk, dont take indirect as being 30 min friendly conversations. I repeat, no one in PU, has ever advocated any form of game where your intentions arent clear after a few mins. No good indirect PUA doesnt flirt. No good indirect PUA doesnt touch girls. No good indirect PUA doesnt escalate. You may prefer direct, but come on, dont put indirect into manipulative. That's a stretch

If a guy is looking for a relationship then he can be direct about that too. Again you don't fully understand what direct is if you think it is only about getting a one night stand. And can the abbreviations - I don't understand them all and it comes across as nerdy. Its one of the reasons I quit the whole PUA thing because it makes the whole notion of talking to women come across as a mathematical equation. I find your post actually quite condescending as you're assuming that I have low to no standards, which is completely untrue and ridiculous. You can fully direct and find out a girl's standards by doing that, which I see you are at least diplomatic enough to say.

However, what you are saying about PUA not advocating hiding your intentions is downright wrong. I have seen multiple sites, publications and articles where hiding your intentions was fully advocated in order to draw her in. Yes not all people in PUA say that, I will agree. It absolutely is not a stretch to deem PUA as manipulative - this entire thread was initially focused on another PUA technique, and when you are using techniques you are trying to manipulate a situation to get what you want. Its called 'How to force an approach invite'. That is implying a technique.

If there is one thing among people who are TRULY direct, I'd say their opinions are pretty congruent with each other. There is no 'direct game'. You are either straightforward and to the point or you're not. I'd still say it requires practice but certainly not to the level of being anal like in PUA where you're paranoid about 'shit tests', 'IOI's', 'being alpha', 'negs', 'AMOGs', 'touching', 'escalation' etc etc. If you are having to come up with mapped out techniques to get a girl you are being manipulative. Being direct is not a technique, it is a way of living. It is not about going up to a girl and saying "Hey baby, I'm gonna bang you silly", rather you look them dead in the eye, speak slowly, tell them that you find them desirable and that you'd love them to share a bed with you tonight/you would love to get to know them better as you're looking for a nice girlfriend. But this is just an example of direct - you just say whatever is on your mind as it comes to you, not "Is this the right thing to say to get her to like me?"

Direct or Indirect does not guarantee either, but more Indirect sorts will make bold claims about being able to seduce 'any girl' (at least both Richard La Ruina and Mystery made those claims in the past). However being direct carries a lot less baggage and allows for you to be your REAL self and to say what you REALLY think and do what YOU want to do, not be or say or do what you are supposed to do.

I stand by my first statement when I contradicted the original poster. It means you treat the woman as a human being and respect that she has the intelligence to decide whether or not she wants to go home with you, or go out with you.

Umm...you're the one who just said that you go up and "state your intentions"...no flirting, no drinks all that remember? In fact you also said:
Just using direct by how you've presented it. I read nothing from you talking about dating or relationships or getting to know someone. Just sex. That's how YOU presented it.
Umm...that's not PU nerd talk...I used 2 abbreviations in 2 paragraphs. ONS=One night stand and FWB = friend with benefits. It's not really making an "equation" out of anything, go to a forum about fishing or bodybuilding and you'll see abbreviations. It's TYPING. Its the internet...anyways
I said the opposite:
So I actually said I wont say you have low standards, just how you view things may be different from another guy.

As to MANIPULATION, as Pebble said, telling a girl to come watch a movie at your place is not manipulation.

Definition:

to manage or influence skillfully, especially in an unfair manner:

When you give a girl a bs reason to come over, she knows she's coming over to hookup or whatever. You arent tricking her, and it's never been told to trick girls to come to your place. Manipulation, would be like if a girl asks you for $10, you say ok, come over for it, she comes to your place, you have no money and she really believed she was coming over for a favor. Yes, telling a girl to come over for a movie when you intend to have sex or whatever, is not 100% honest, but come on....dont use words like manipulation for that. Another example of manipulation to a lesser degree or serious dishonesty, would be to ask a girl for her phone for an emergency, secretly save her number, then text her later using the number she didnt give you. That's dishonesty. No one has ever advocating tricking a girl. Majick's technique is not some voodoo shit on a girl. All he is saying is make eye contact and approach. He's not brainwashing her. You're not treating her as a child either...where are you getting these ideas from?? Like asking a girl to come to your place to watch xyz is somehow influencing her?
I cant speak on other forums, but this one is mostly non routine stuff and non all those flashy terms. A guy makes a post about how to open a girl...He probably gets one guy saying a routine, and 10 guys telling him to say "Hi" and just do it. Same with most if not all topics. Not alot of "tactics" here man...read the threads.

Bold claims. You and the other guy have talked about just being direct. Ok. What after that. Just be direct. Ok, so just go to girls, say what you want, if they do then what. Also, it's disingenuous to harp direct yet make no mentions of looks. JUST BE DIRECT. Forget everything else. You'll get hotter girls (your words). Pretty bold claims. Again, I mostly do direct and I enjoy it. But the claims you guys are making about direct, and the forum, are just incorrect. If you equate making eye contact with a girl and walking up as some kinda manipulation, then please learn the meaning of the word. It's not mind control. It's not some trick. And lol, its not treating her like a retard. None of these things are related to what was presented.

Can you elaborate on this a bit? How does being straightforward and to the point require practice?

_________________
mpuaforum.proboards.com

Mike, let me speak to you directly.
I don't get it. Do you even read the content you're providing? Also, you're posting for someone else's blog? The irony is that, that in itself is indirect of him LOL

You're either a spammer or just obtuse.

Yes. The threads seem like the usual "what is a good opener for bla bla?" But if you take the time to read some of the replies from the wiser guys. It's usually people advising them to be honest and direct (in whatever definition of "direct" means to you.)

You're all talk so far and i'm calling you out.

Post an infield of you being truly direct. As in...you approach a girl saying you want to have sex with her, then the girl agreeing to have sex with you. Before you reply to this that you have nothing to prove but that's not true, you have everything to prove since you charge your services to men and come here trying to be an authority.

Mike, speak to us directly, Your TRUE intentions around here is to get traffic to your website, am I wrong or am right in saying that?

I have date on Saturday. I suggested to her to come for a drink with me. My intention is to sleep with her. We both know that if i was to tell her I will be trying to bang her that she will decline. You're really retarded if you think this is "manipulation". This is social conditioning which I did not invent. This is basic stuff regarding theory. I'm not saying it's impossible either but it might work with girls who are way down on the looks from my experience.

Also. I'm pretty sure that herself kinda knows what my intentions are despite inviting her for a drink. Women are not stupid and I think it's more classy than telling her to meet me to suck my cock.

And as for someone who thinks they are advanced, it's pretty damn ignorant to disregard forcing ioi's if you haven't tried it.

2x6 = 12
3x4= 12
Etc

See? There is more then one way to skin a cat. If you took the time to understand this approach. It's pretty damn effective and efficient, it is also direct and you get less blow outs. I don't get how stubborn and 2 dimensional you can be.

Anyway. Time to prove yourself pal

_________________
USER HAS BEEN BANNED FOR REPEATEDLY IGNORING MOD WARNINGS AND MULTIPLE RULE VIOLATIONS

I also said that if you want a relationship with someone you should state your intentions in that respect too. I believe you should be direct and honest throughout a relationship. Simple as.
Umm...that's not PU nerd talk...I used 2 abbreviations in 2 paragraphs. ONS=One night stand and FWB = friend with benefits. It's not really making an "equation" out of anything, go to a forum about fishing or bodybuilding and you'll see abbreviations. It's TYPING. Its the internet...anyways[/quote]

Yes it is PU nerd talk. If its not then its internet nerd talk. I've seen these sorts of abbreviations used in the literature so I have no idea how to tell the difference between the other.
I said the opposite:
So I actually said I wont say you have low standards, just how you view things may be different from another guy.[/quote]

OK then.
How do you know she knows she's coming over for a bullshit reason. I guess if you screw her then you can form a logical conclusion that maybe she did, but you make your life easier if you're straightforward with her. And if she didn't know, then what? A guy less skilled than you could potentially take that on board and then what. I know what manipulation means, and you are working a situation in a certain way in order to get a specific result. That is being manipulative. You just take personal offence at the notion because I have suggested that it is manipulative and have contradicted you.
I cant speak on other forums, but this one is mostly non routine stuff and non all those flashy terms. A guy makes a post about how to open a girl...He probably gets one guy saying a routine, and 10 guys telling him to say "Hi" and just do it. Same with most if not all topics. Not alot of "tactics" here man...read the threads.[/quote]

Pretty much every single thread is choc-a-block with routines for 'How do I get her back to my place' or asking if what she's doing is an IOI or not. You can either present them with a routine or advise them to go direct. Most people do the former - end of story.
Bold claims. You and the other guy have talked about just being direct. Ok. What after that. Just be direct. Ok, so just go to girls, say what you want, if they do then what. Also, it's disingenuous to harp direct yet make no mentions of looks. JUST BE DIRECT. Forget everything else. You'll get hotter girls (your words). Pretty bold claims. Again, I mostly do direct and I enjoy it. But the claims you guys are making about direct, and the forum, are just incorrect. If you equate making eye contact with a girl and walking up as some kinda manipulation, then please learn the meaning of the word. It's not mind control. It's not some trick. And lol, its not treating her like a retard. None of these things are related to what was presented.[/quote]

Yes I have got hotter girls through being direct. You are direct throughout your relationship, whether its throughout a one night stand or for the years you spend together. You say what's on your mind at all stages. If you're arguing with me then you don't "do mostly direct". At best you do 'direct game' - the two are different as the latter is essentially an item in the PUA bag of tricks. And staring at a girl to 'force an IOI' is trying to manipulate a situation to see whether she likes you or not so you can avoid a 'No'. I said you should risk it and just go over and just say what you've got to say. Being direct isn't just about the approach, it is a direct approach to life and that includes women.

Besides my outlook isn't that bold - I have already said over and over that direct doesn't guarantee success and no direct advocate has said that, but an indirect one has: "Bypass a woman's rejection circuitry, allowing you no possibility of ever being rejected by any woman ever again" - that's a far bolder claim than I have seen among the direct 'faction', if you want to call us that.

Building up confidence essentially. If you haven't been upfront and to the point (direct) for most of your life you need to start putting practice into being that.

It would make a change from how you speak to women I suppose.
I don't get it. Do you even read the content you're providing? Also, you're posting for someone else's blog? The irony is that, that in itself is indirect of him LOL[/quote]

You are asking me to speak on someone else's behalf. If you want to know why he wrote that then you'd best ask them. However my take on this is that if you are constantly thinking of ways to keep your girl by using techniques and not saying your mind, then I'd say you're pretty buggered. If you're direct you don't have to keep worrying about the 'right' thing to say.
I'm calling out the entire PUA industry. And what the hell? Usually people advise others to be honest and direct? Then why are you attacking what I said? You either support direct or you don't, and direct means only this (which I am quoting Alan Roger Currie on another forum:

"Direct (adjective, defined as it relates to communication with others) - To communicate in a manner that is candid, frank and straightforward; Absolute; Absent of ambiguity; Specific; e.g., "I asked him a question, and he responded with a direct answer"

Indirect (adjective, defined as it relates to communication with others) - To communicate in a manner that is not candid, frank or straightforward; roundabout; devious; not clear; equivocal; e.g., "After offering employment to the candidate, I was not sure if he accepted the job because his response letter was written in very indirect language."

Common synonyms for the adjective "direct": absolute, blunt, candid, explicit, forthright, frank, matter-of-fact, open, outspoken, plainspoken, point-blank, sincere, straight, straight from the shoulder, straightforward, unambiguous, unconcealed, undisguised, unequivocal

Common synonyms for the adjective "indirect": ambiguous, circuitous, circular, complicated, contingent, crooked, devious, duplicitous, erratic, implied, long-winded, meandering, oblique, obscure, out-of-the-way, periphrastic, rambling, serpentine, sinister, snaking, sneaky, tortuous, twisting, underhanded, vagrant, vague"
I don't run a website and I don't charge for any services because I don't offer them.
She kinda knows what your intentions are? You don't have to tell her to suck your cock but you can still be direct and be straightforward. And yeah I agree, social conditioning is bullshit, but I'd prefer to bypass it rather than attempt to create a new type via Pick Up.
I have tried to 'force' IOI's - it didn't work. Where did I say I thought I was 'advanced'? I have an opinion that differs from you - that is all. I think the only way to become advanced in direct is via the growing of confidence. I know how to approach girls in an indirect manner.
You really are a condescending twat aren't you?

I'm amazed that any of you are actually responding to Mike.
He's parsing words so finely that it's clear he's just looking for fight. Which is a prime sign of KJ. Though it is ironic that for a man who advocates "being direct", he's so vague and refuses to answer in a plain, clear manner. Perhaps it's just his Chav exposure to education, I don't know.

It's pretty obvious he doesn't walk up to attractive women and say "You're hot, let's fuck!". That only works on FAT women and gay men. Actually, never mind. That's probably exactly how Mike approaches all of his lays.

_________________
RSDTyler