|
|
|
|
|
| David Deangelo Double Your Dating - Any feedback?
Posted: 8/23/2009 9:45:59 AM |
crisscrim wrote: Hello well I am thinking about reading that book from Deangelo but i have one issue. In his latest newsletter he is answering this guys question on how to get this girl he in interested in.
The deal with this one was that this girl has like zero dating ability and so Deangelo proceeds to tell him to be careful because they could be headed to vegas to get married.
Now i can try to understand this in two ways, one is he is trying to help this guy avoid a doomed marriage or two, he is trying to help this guy avoid the aisle all together even if it would be a good thing.
I suppose it is the latter because he goes on to elaborate "well unless you want to drop of your future kids to a soccer game while wearing dockers and answering her calls be my guest!".
So in conclusion I believe his stuff is good but at the same time I do not believe his ultimate goal for his students is to find good women to marry but to find women to bed and my concern is does that sort of not help me anymore or what?
No, David DeAngelo isn't into the married with kids lifestyle, but that's him! You don't have to follow his words to the letter. At your age, however, you really shouldn't be looking to get married. I'm not saying you should 'play the field' (that's up to you), but marriage brings a lot of responsibility with it. If you're married and you find out you two have nothing in common anymore except for the roof over your head, then it's like being in a bad roommate situation that's not easy to get out of. Society at large (parents, friends, churches, media, entertainment) all tell us that we should get married, have kids, have a suburban home, etc. The current divorce rate is well over 50%. People get married and find out it's not exactly "happily ever after". You're only in your early 20s. Go through several roommates (and yes, some or all of them can be female) and you'll find out that most are not worth rooming with except for splitting costs down the middle, and then some roommates are quite irresponsible, leaving you to deal with all the expenses, either while living with you or by suddenly moving out. Back in the 1990s I read a book called "How to be the Jerk Women Love" by F.J. Shark (which he now sells as an overpriced e-book). In one chapter he goes through the numbers and comes to the conclusion that it's much cheaper to see hookers than it is to get married. He even concludes that each sex session in a marriage costs well over $1,000 and says, "Hope you got your money's worth!"
Now if you get a girlfriend and you both move in together, that could be a good situation. Just pay attention to the common marriage laws in your state. However, you'll find that women your age will fall for the smooth-talking jerks. They'll probably get pregnant and abandoned (or f***ed and chucked). After several rounds of this, they'll be looking for a nice guy with a good job ($$$!) so he can support her and the kids she had with another man (or other men). I think the thing with David DeAngelo and other PUA (pick-up artist) 'gurus' is that they want to teach nice guys how to pick up women like jerks do (and make a lot of money in the process!). After all, the real jerks don't need any of this 'education' to pick up women. They're already doing that! | |
|
| |
| David Deangelo Double Your Dating - Any feedback?
Posted: 9/3/2009 8:22:15 PM |
OH SNAP! he put out some new shyt talking about keeping a woman long term. So do ya'll think that has any merit?
Well then take it with a grain of salt. Shoot any woman he knows is going to be superskeptical of him -- I bet he has a hard time keeping a woman because she doesn't trust him.
But for us peons, his info is useful as heck. Usually when a man is romancing a woman he's doing all the right things to attract her. They eventually get married and as stupid and lazy as we men can be, we stop being that dude that tickled her fancy. All Dave says is keep being the dude -- what's wrong with that?
Candy and flowers after she's left you for another guy with a bigger better deal is too late, Snapper! | |
|
| David Deangelo Double Your Dating - Any feedback?
Posted: 9/3/2009 9:33:52 PM | I love how people chime in and pretend to know all about this topic when they know next to nothing.
I didn't pay for the DD system, but i got the emails for a while and most of his stuff makes perfect sense. He's definitely onto something.
He's not telling guys to "be a jerk" and I think that statements like this are a gross misrepresentation.
He talks about not giving your power away and being a MAN. He's right about this.
Also, he talks about being "cocky and funny" and for dating and the early part of relationships this advice is on the nose.
He talks about not getting into a pu**y trance and going all wussy. He's right about that too.
Just from his emails I can look back and see mistakes I have made.
Would I buy the CD's? Well...no. I'm not sure why but I can't bring myself to do it.
But i do think that the emails were good and reminded me of some things that I should observe.
Thing is, some guys just KNOW this stuff right out of the gate. Things like not being too available, not coming on too strong too quickly, etc.etc.
Other guys know absolutely NOTHING about dating, so they should do their best to get educated on the topic.
DD is not some evil dude who is scamming people. Not at all. In fact, from what I can see, his advice is pretty valuable for those who need it.
You wanna see a scam? Read up about the Federal Reserve! | |
|
| David Deangelo Double Your Dating - Any feedback?
Posted: 9/3/2009 10:02:08 PM | | This woman can't STAND sarcasm. Be confident, funny (natural not forced or canned humor), relaxed, generous and in charge. My suggestion to guys that want to learn how to charm women is to take a dance class. You will learn a lot about what being confident and in charge means when you learm how to lead a woman in a dance and you will also learn how to laugh at yourself. | |
|
| David Deangelo Double Your Dating - Any feedback?
Posted: 9/3/2009 10:41:12 PM |
You will learn a lot about what being confident and in charge means when you learm how to lead a woman in a dance
Very interesting advice....
I observed a conversation between two younger guys at the gym today, and just chuckled to myself...takin' about some gal the dude met at the bar and it seemed like they were taking a page right out of DD's material...playing games...jumping though hoops....
What's all this about not making yourself too available? To a man with integrity it means sticking to your plans...and not dropping them just for a date....of couse...this is taken way out of context, like consciously making the effort to not call for a week...or outright lying and canceling a date....
Ya, you can jump through hoops...make her laugh...but when the time comes to get really intimate...can you be a real man and evoke the emotions that she needs to feel? Can you lead her into feeling a connection that she can't deny? If you're gonna do this...you gotta drop some of the truth that DD spews...
They eventually get married and as stupid and lazy as we men can be, we stop being that dude that tickled her fancy. All Dave says is keep being the dude -- what's wrong with that?
If you have to consciously make an effort to "be that dude" then you're not GENUINELY "that dude" in the first place. You have to get to a frame of mind where you don't try to be somebody...you just are...in the moment...brilliant seemless interaction off the cuff....
| |
|
| David Deangelo Double Your Dating - Any feedback?
Posted: 9/5/2009 1:04:27 AM |
DD is not some evil dude who is scamming people. Not at all.
he's not all evil, but he's not all angel either. deangelo is a salesman. a master salesman. what do all master salesmen have in common? the ability to manipulate in order to close.
sure, his program has good ideas about personal empowerment. but he seeks to manipulate men through their own fear and insecurities. the seed of fear is implanted in his favorite weasel word - 'wussy' - and it goes like this. if you're not getting as much pus$y as you want, it's because you're a 'wussy,' you're less than a man, you have no balls. now this is a completely subjective judgment that no one is obligated to accept. but if you're already AFRAID that maybe, just maybe you don't measure up, that word 'wussy' is gonna whack your insecurity button hard. but now that deangelo has cut you down, aren't you lucky he's there to build you back up. yes! he'll show you how to remove the 'wussy' label he so generously bestowed on you - for a fee. what a guy!
if you're ok with some guy yanking on your fear chain to get you to open your wallet, more power to ya. | |
|
| David Deangelo Double Your Dating - Any feedback?
Posted: 9/5/2009 7:00:53 AM |
Furthermore, have any women read his works and what do y'all think of his advice?
David DAngelo teaches men how to pick up as many women as possible, use them for sex, then dump them and start the whole cycle all over again.
What do I think of him?
I think he's made a tremendous contribution to the chasm filled with hurt between the sexes and men stupidly lap it up = all drinking from the same cesspool.
Anyone who encourages men to pick up women like they are going through a drive through for a cheap burger is ...........is...........well what do you call that...........opportunistic, exploitative, unconscionable.
Funny though that he is wildly successful.
Says a lot about men doesn't it. It's SAD. | |
|
| David Deangelo Double Your Dating - Any feedback?
Posted: 9/5/2009 10:21:42 AM | David DAngelo teaches men how to pick up as many women as possible, use them for sex, then dump them and start the whole cycle all over again.
Spoken like someone who has never read a page of the guy. Sad.
DD's stuff is decent, they work and they really opened my eyes back in the day when I used to be a big wuss and had a distorted, idealistic view of the world. However they are pretty limited in scope. He overemphasizes the attraction phase, the initial few minutes of an interaction, the c0cky-funny attitude etc. but doesn't go far into the comfort and rapport stages, where most time is spent. Another downside is that he rehashes the same few (good) ideas over and over in hundreds of cds, dvds and ebooks. He's a businessman after all, he used to do that for a living (I think he moved to real estate, sales or something else after that).
Having said that, I definitely recommend his DYD book to anyone completely clueless about women and attraction, it's a good starting point. For guys that are not doormats and already have some success, his stuff may seem kinda obvious and simplistic. There is more thorough and advanced material around (Mystery, RSD, Juggler, Lance Mason, etc.) but none of it matters unless one goes out of his comfort zone and tries to learn it in practice. As you can't learn to drive a motorcycle by reading a book, similarly you can't learn women by just reading books and watching dvds. | |
|
| David Deangelo Double Your Dating - Any feedback?
Posted: 9/6/2009 11:46:55 PM | He's a Pick Up Artist.
Plus he's one of the sickest online marketers around, LOL!
check out stuff like, www.CasanovaCrew.com one of my boys knows those dudes and they're CRAZY good with chicks.
They hold weekly meetings and monthly seminars about picking up chicks. Pretty crazy stuff they got out there nowadays. | |
|
| David Deangelo Double Your Dating - Any feedback?
Posted: 9/6/2009 11:49:26 PM | | I've read "Double Your Dating." I didn't find anything in it that was really revolutionary. Half of it was bull; the other half was common sense. I don't think using magic tricks and ignoring girls in clubs is going to get me laid. | |
|
| |
| David Deangelo Double Your Dating - Any feedback?
Posted: 9/7/2009 10:42:24 AM | I've read "Double Your Dating." I didn't find anything in it that was really revolutionary. Half of it was bull; the other half was common sense. I don't think using magic tricks and ignoring girls in clubs is going to get me laid.
You're just not in his main target group. What is "common sense" to you is not common at all to many guys (it wasn't for me 5-6 years ago when I first read it). You're right though, you won't get laid just by being aloof, c0cky and funny, but at least you'll stop being the sucker that buys girls drinks and gets a "nice meeting you". | |
|
| David Deangelo Double Your Dating - Any feedback?
Posted: 9/7/2009 1:57:57 PM | whatilikeaboutyou,
David DAngelo teaches men how to pick up as many women as possible, use them for sex, then dump them and start the whole cycle all over again.
You read his stuff? Didn't think so. I think for guys who would dream to be able to pick up as many women as possible to USE them for sex, dump them, then start all over again, yes, his advice (or ANY effective advice on how to charm someone) works. He's a little over-the-top but his main focus is on improving oneself - be confident and leave that strong impression.
Anyone who encourages men to pick up women like they are going through a drive through for a cheap burger is .... Says a lot about men doesn't it. It's SAD.
Wait -- what about the women they pick up, then?? What about them?? If there is any equality, first and foremost, it's that women are not children nor being intellectually vunerable as a gender. They are EQUALLY responsible for being picked up as the one picking up, whether it be in a good setting or bad one. If a guy is going the sleaze route, the girl accepting the proposition is going down that route, too -- just the same.
One thing that gets to me is the phrase "use them for sex". Again, women are not children. Just because people on a vacation or in their own locale end up having sex-for-fun, does not mean anyone was USED for sex. Some people date for the sake of company, kept barely-above-platonic and string them along... in many of those cases, people are being used (for attention, cure-for-loneliness, to get an ex jealous, etc.). If a guy picks up a girl and they hook up, whether it be to 2nd base or home plate, they're both getting something out of it and know what they're getting into -- mutually. A guy would be using a gal for sex in that situation -if- he LED HER ON to believe something false in order to get sex out of it. Leading someone on by falsifcation is not required, and although I'm not an expert in the pickup-artist-handbooks, I've never come across anything suggesting one does that... and in fact, quite the opposite. | |
|
| David Deangelo Double Your Dating - Any feedback?
Posted: 9/7/2009 6:52:29 PM |
A guy would be using a gal for sex in that situation -if- he LED HER ON to believe something false in order to get sex out of it. Leading someone on by falsifcation is not required, and although I'm not an expert in the pickup-artist-handbooks, I've never come across anything suggesting one does that... and in fact, quite the opposite.
I don't understand this part at all.......
Have you ever heard the phrase "will you respect me in the morning"? It came about when men would promise a woman the world, get into her pants, and then pretend he didn't even know who she was.....except to all his buddies, who got every gory detail of the encounter.
This isn't the "sleaze route", and has little to do with being a pick-up artist, for that matter.
It's called "manipulation" and while the payoff looks like it's sex, it is really "proving" that one has the ability to "charm" someone into doing something they are hesitant about doing.
Once the mission is complete, that's it, fun's over....nothing left to do but brag.
Never read David Deangelo, and I don't plan to. | |
|
| David Deangelo Double Your Dating - Any feedback?
Posted: 9/7/2009 9:12:24 PM |
They dont understand how t figure women out, why things are all backwards wanting to be nice to them. While in real life its all about doing the oppositte, and trying to be a bit difficult to read. This can help entice women
Oh great, a whole new breed of not nice men who thing being evasive and difficult to read (HEAD game player) is attractive.
Bring back the neanderthals - at least they were straight forward. | |
|
| David Deangelo Double Your Dating - Any feedback?
Posted: 9/7/2009 9:22:42 PM |
Never read David Deangelo, and I don't plan to.
Okay, just for the record tho, you can't complain about him then...
It came about when men would promise a woman the world, get into her pants, and then pretend he didn't even know who she was...
Yeah, that's using someone for sex. But here's the kicker -- that's not required to "get laid" at all, and more relevant to this thread, it's not what "pick up artist" authors/speakers such as DeAngelo suggest to do. In fact, being a guy who promises to cater to a woman he runs into at a bar and who can love her for every moment in the years to come is playing "Mr Nice Guy" -- which rarely works for even a phone #, let alone bringing her home to bed or doing so on a date afterwards.
This isn't the "sleaze route", and has little to do with being a pick-up artist, for that matter. It's called "manipulation" and while the payoff looks like it's sex, it is really "proving" that one has the ability to "charm" someone into doing something they are hesitant about doing.
Well, manipulation-for-sex, IMO, would be a sleaze route. The point of this relevant sub-topic is whether or not a guy is "using" a gal for sex because he likes sex, and is wanting to have sex asap. Whether that's "sleazy" in the sense of "dirty" isn't the point -- but whether he's manipulating. Manipulation's not required, that's my point, that's all.
...except to all his buddies, who got every gory detail of the encounter.
I think you hit something very important here. I always wondered why guys would be labeled as USING a girl when they wouldn't be using (manipulating) at all. Also, when a gal says "I dont want a guy who just wants one thing" -- but will be rubbing her legs together to have sex right off the bat when you meet her. Never made sense to me, but that last quote sheds a bright light:
I think when it comes down to it, women need to be respected properly -- and that's what it's about. If a girl gets the vibe from a guy that he's a braggart about having sex and tells his buds, they equate that with "using" -- ie disrespect. They don't want a guy to only like them for sex -- they want them to like them for who they are -- EVEN IF the gal is very open to a physical fling situation with a guy. Gals get easily pegged (by other women a majority of the time) as tramps, and they're very protective of not being seen like that, and that's what it boils down to -- a guy respecting the woman for who she is -- whether it be dating as the purpose, or a bar pickup-then-sex situation. If she feels disrespected -- like a guy telling his buddies bragging or that he doesn't even really know or care about who she is as a person -- she'll call it being "used", when using/manipulation wasn't applied at all in the first place.
I think a good analogy would be the accusation of people "playing games" in the dating scene. Many people will say "they were playing games with me!" when in fact, all that happened was the other person lost interest and they couldn't get the hint. In that case, they are just as hurt as if they were led on, when they weren't -- but they just call it that anyway. | |
|
| David Deangelo Double Your Dating - Any feedback?
Posted: 9/8/2009 6:16:18 PM | I get your point.....very nice job of splitting hairs....
What I'm going to say doesn't apply to everyone...nothing ever applies to everyone.
If a woman comes on to you, that's a ballgame of it's own.....she may have a dozen different motives.
If you come on to a woman, with the intent of having a one night fling....but you don't tell her that, it's manipulation....plain and simple.
Manipulation is all about intent. If you omit your intention, just don't bother mentioning it, it's manipulation.
Women will sleep with men, who appear to be interested in them, after a very short time. The woman is expecting something more than sex, because the man APPEARS TO BE INTERESTED IN THEM.
Walk into a bar, and say to a woman " I'm just here to get laid tonight, you game?" Think it will work? Possibly, but not too often.....
I have slept with two people right up front. I had a three year relationship with one of them.....I married the other!
See how there's that dishonesty thing happening? | |
|
| David Deangelo Double Your Dating - Any feedback?
Posted: 9/8/2009 7:14:36 PM |
If you come on to a woman, with the intent of having a one night fling....but you don't tell her that, it's manipulation....plain and simple.
Manipulation is all about intent. If you omit your intention, just don't bother mentioning it, it's manipulation.
What a load of bull. Next thing you'll say is we should go around like walking billboards showing with red flashing lights all our internal state, feeling, intentions, hopes, and every random thought that passes through our mind.
He has one or more intentions, she has one or more intentions. If some of those intentions happen to coincide, or (more often) change during the interaction so that they coincide, we have a winner. Manipulation, schmanipulation, call it whatever you like for all I care; it's a natural phenomenon.
Women will sleep with men, who appear to be interested in them, after a very short time. The woman is expecting something more than sex, because the man APPEARS TO BE INTERESTED IN THEM.
Here's where you get it wrong. When a successful seduction takes place, the woman is not "expecting" anything, at least in the usual rational meaning of the word. She's overwhelmed by her emotions, she's being "swept off her feet". At this very short time before sleeping with someone she doesn't do long term family planning, she just goes with the flow. From her point of view, everything flows so natural and so smooth that "it just happened". If any expectations emerge (very often they don't), they emerge the next morning or the next week, not before sex. | |
|
| David Deangelo Double Your Dating - Any feedback?
Posted: 9/8/2009 9:02:27 PM | Hmmmm, funny.....you're profile says that you're a man.
Where did you learn to read women's minds?
When a successful seduction takes place, the woman is not "expecting" anything
Here's the meaning of the word seduction:
"In sociology, seduction is the process of deliberately enticing a person to engage in some sort of sexual behavior, frequently sexual in nature. The word seduction stems from Latin and means literally "to lead astray."" Quoted from Wikipedia.
meaning of "lead astray":
"give false or misleading information to"
Now that we have that cleared up......because the woman is "overwhelmed by her emotions", and believes that she's being "swept off her feet", she has "expectations" before the first piece of clothing is removed.
Alot of women (not all) will not remove their clothing, unless they believe that there is a chance of some kind of future with the man who is seducing her. | |
|
| David Deangelo Double Your Dating - Any feedback?
Posted: 9/8/2009 10:04:03 PM |
Alot of women (not all) will not remove their clothing, unless they believe that there is a chance of some kind of future with the man who is seducing her.
In other words...a woman with integrity needs an emotional connection to have mind blowing sex...that's the one thing that DD endorsers don't realize...sure you may be purging bad social conditioning with this stuff...but he's sucking you into another kind of social conditioning....
NO...it's not manly to boost your ego getting more numbers than you know what to do with and having a few quick lays to get a notch on yer belt....that's where our culture leads you astray...
When a successful seduction takes place, the woman is not "expecting" anything
In a typical sexual encounter, the man leads the woman...there is an inherent responsibility that you must take on....this could be taken way out of context...but you are responsible for the woman and her emotions. If anything, she expects you to tap into your primal instincts, evoke her emotions and give her more pleasure than she's ever dreamed possible....but the typical PUA trolling the bars doesn't really care about her pleasure...he's out for the conquest because he's brainwashed into thinking the ability to bed any woman he desires makes him powerful and "manly" | |
|
| David Deangelo Double Your Dating - Any feedback?
Posted: 9/8/2009 10:23:26 PM | Here's the meaning of the word seduction:
"In sociology, seduction is the process of deliberately enticing a person to engage in some sort of sexual behavior, frequently sexual in nature. The word seduction stems from Latin and means literally "to lead astray."" Quoted from Wikipedia.
How ironic that you talk about "manipulation" and then you selectively quote what suits your agenda. Here are some omitted quotes:
"As a result, the term may have a positive or negative connotation (...) Seen positively, seduction is a synonym for the act of charming someone — male or female — by an appeal to the senses, often with the goal of reducing unfounded fears and leading to their (sexual) emancipation. (...) In contemporary academic debate, therefore, the morality of seduction depends on the long-term impacts on the individuals concerned, rather than the act itself, and may not necessarily carry the negative connotations expressed in dictionary definitions . (emphasis mine).
DD and most others in this space teach men how to transition from being a stranger with a woman up to bedding her. After that point, you're on your own. Nobody advises (neither condemns) men to ditch women after sex and start all over again. Whether a relationship is going to last 3 hours, 3 years or 3 decades is up to you.
Hope this clears things up a bit. | |
|
| David Deangelo Double Your Dating - Any feedback?
Posted: 9/8/2009 11:27:13 PM | Quazi,
get your point.....very nice job of splitting hairs....
I wasn't splitting hairs. I was going into detail to explain the very important, wide difference -- and yes, brainstorming about a related topic... Wouldn't call that splitting hairs, though.
If you come on to a woman, with the intent of having a one night fling....but you don't tell her that, it's manipulation....plain and simple.
Totally disagree. First, when a woman is in the mood for a one-night fling, wouldn't the same rules apply? If my intent is to get to know a girl and to NOT HAVE SEX with her, and I don't confess this intent, am I manipulating her? No. If my intent is to get a girl's phone #, and I don't say "Hi, I'm so-and-so. How are you? By the way, my intent here is to get your number... let's continue before I actually ask you for it...", am I manipulating her? Now, about sexual desires... let's say a guy approaches a girl at Daytona Beach during spring break. Girl and guy talk, flirt, kiss, share drinks, and guy says "Wanna come to my hotel across the road?" Girl says yes with a smile... they go back, they have sex. Was he supposed to say, "My intention is to have a fling while here on vacation", therefore he was USING her? Huh? How would they not be "manipulating" -each other- (which they were not btw)? Same can be said for boy and girl meeting at their local bar.
Manipulation is all about intent. If you omit your intention, just don't bother mentioning it, it's manipulation.
No, again, disagree. Manipulation requires intent, but manipulation is about TRICKING someone. Yes, in particular circumstances, yes, leaving something out on purpose can be a tool used in trickery. Manipulation would be where you gave the impression (or through blatant words even) that you were not looking to just boink-and-leave, but then did. I'm sure that does happen, but my point is w/o splitting hairs -- that not explaining one's specific intentions does not mean you're using/manipulating them. In this situation it requires you LEADING THEM ON. If a girl's going to go home with a guy from a bar that night, it's not by default that he's leading her on because he didn't say "My intent is to have a fling; I'm not interested in having a relationship (with you)". He would have to lead her on to believe that first.
The woman is expecting something more than sex, because the man APPEARS TO BE INTERESTED IN THEM.
Wow, you're speaking for virtually all women in all situations, or even a wide majority of those who end up having a one-night fling, that's always set up like that? Tsk tsk, don't stereotype. By that rationale, there would be virtually no "skanks" (that women certainly scoff at) in existence. He'd have to lead her on to believe that he was pursuing a dating relationship with her for him to be manipulating.
Walk into a bar, and say to a woman " I'm just here to get laid tonight, you game?" Think it will work? Possibly, but not too often.....
A guy won't do that because it wouldn't work. A girl won't do that because her self-image would be shattered, and would actually work a little less effectively than not saying it outright, actually.
See how there's that dishonesty thing happening?
Oh, I see dishonesty happening out there, sure. On both sides of the ball, and in other ways than just sex (attention, just to have someone around, just for sex, etc).
But a guy or girl having a one-night fling:
(a) Does not mean they are sinister and were planning on using the other and "ha ha gotcha!" running away
(b) Does not mean their intent was ONLY to have a one-night fling, whether it continued beyond that -or- Not.
But some girls will ASSUME they were tricked and manipulated if it doesn't pan out. Wtf? So, if you go back to someone's house from the bar, and you make out a bit in the car... and he becomes "unavailable" and "busy" and disappears -- he manipulated you to get some kisses? What if went to 2nd base? 3rd? What if the gender roles were switched around?
Again, manipulation requires leading someone on to believe something else. Just talking to a girl, sharing laughs, bantering, flirting, does not mean "I am pursuing a relationship with you" by default... and if a girl's that way with a guy, it doesn't mean it either! | |
|
| David Deangelo Double Your Dating - Any feedback?
Posted: 9/9/2009 10:32:02 AM | My definition of "seduction" is the one used in "sociology"....which is what we're talking about.
Here's the Wikipedia (disambiguated) definition of "seduction"
"Seduction is the process of enticing a reluctant person to engage in sexual behavior."
End of defining "seduction".....for me, anyway.
Of course DD cannot predict what will happen after the woman has been bedded. That's where the intent of the reader comes in. Is he reading the book to pick-up chicks, or to learn some techniques to attract the attention of potential mates. | |
|
| David Deangelo Double Your Dating - Any feedback?
Posted: 9/9/2009 10:33:31 AM | I'm 56 years old, female. I was introduced to DD about five years ago by a then 19 year old friend. I was really turned off by him at first but even then had to admit that many things he said were right on. I kept reading his material. I didn't care for the tone of it but I also thought that he really understood some things about women and creating attraction that I wish more men understood. I read his enewsletter for awhile. I think his tone has changed over time. It used to come off as kind of predatory and when I was last reading it (which hasn't been for several months) I thought his tone was much better.
DD is a master salesman and that's some of what he's teaching guys. Is it manipulative? One could be manipulative with this information or one could use it to put your best foot forward. Think of this: if you smile, you tend to feel better, the people around you tend to feel better, and people will tend to find you more attractive. So, if you get into the habit of smiling at people, is that manipulative? If, during a conversation, you remind yourself not to hog the conversation and let the other person talk (if you tend to be a talkative person) are you being manipulative? We all do things to try to influence people so we can get what we want. I think it becomes manipulative when you are dishonest.
I've recommended DD to a lot of men that I've known. I think he's got some very sound advice. I also warn them that they'll get a lot of sales pitch and also that one can use DD's information in a positive way or in a predatory way.
DD's advice is, in a nutshell, to be playful and confident. Playful and confident is attractive. It's a good thing to encourage that.
I'm aware there's a whole pick-up artist community out there. There have always been men who just want to bed as many women as they can for whatever reason. Women really need to take it upon themselves to decide for themselves with whom they are going to do what and take full responsibility for it. The younger and less experienced a woman is, the less able she may be able to think clearly but still, when one reaches the age of consent you really have to take responsibility for your own actions.
I was once lured by a very slick pick-up artist. For awhile I didn't see what was happening but at a certain point it became quite clear. I was amused; he was young enough to be my kid. But he was very good, I was enjoying his company, I never felt pressured and he never did anything to deceive me. We met in a class and he asked me to get together outside of it to practice, which we did, but it also was an opportunity to try to seduce me. At the moment I realized what he was up to, I had a decision to make and I was having such a nice time I decided to go with it. I'm glad I did. It was a great experience. I could have backed away and, in fact, during the course of the evening, as he would get closer, I had *many* opportunities to back off but I didn't.
I think men & women both would benefit by learning to lighten up & not take things so seriously and to learn the art of seduction. Whenever DD is asked about relationship stuff he quickly points out he's a *dating* coach, not a relationship coach. But he does say that if you meet a woman that you really want to stick with, don't forget the stuff that got her interested in the first place. Stay playful. Stay a little unpredictable. I'd say that's sound advice.
I learned a lot from DD. Through him and my young "dating coach" I learned to lighten up around dating and to cultivate the playful & confident side of myself which allows me to be more of who I really am. I often repeat the advice my young friend once gave to me: Be bold. Be confident. Don't be creepy and needy. And flirt with everyone!
Words to live by.
That's *this* woman's opinion of DD. | |
|
|
| Page 32 of 33
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 |
|
Home
login 
