Post: #1

I've been reading CH since he was called Citizen Renegade - obviously he's a genius; obviously Roosh has a longstanding affiliation; obviously he's been discussed on here before. I've used his writing as doctrine in harem game and kept MLTRs more successfully than I ever would have been able to on my own.

But for years now, his focus has been more on reforming male identity than on specific pickup procedure. I have a hard time envisioning cold approaches going well with an attitude of aloof indifference, and a lot of Roissy's DHVs seem to come from withholding interest more than anything else. I've always used something more akin to RSD game to pull and CH-style to maintain. Now I'm aging out of the college market (I'm 27 in a college town) and looking for a more mature approach to approaching.

Any advice on applying this shit - or any advice about the transition to the real world at this age - would be cool. The hardcore asshole / active indifference / return 1 of 3 phone calls thing has always worked for me with girls I'm already fucking, but I can't really see how it applies to the initial pickup.

Post: #2

(06-05-2013 09:44 PM)Collapseofman Wrote:  Now I'm aging out of the college market (I'm 27 in a college town) and looking for a more mature approach to approaching.

First things first. You're 27 years old. You're not aging out of the college market. I just turned 33 and I pickup college chicks, and the same is true for other guys around here in their 30's. Five, ten years from now you'll regret that you prematurely took upon yourself the mantle of maturity. You're younger than you think.

Post: #3

Who is CH?

Post: #4

(06-05-2013 11:41 PM)Gift Wrote:  Who is CH?

Chateau Heartiste aka Roissy.

Post: #5

TL;DR - A Roissy pick up uses the dark triad to exploit weaknesses in feminine thought and psyche through sub-communication and withholding approval. In typical pick up, there's less screening/conditioning for subservience.

______________________________________________

Just spitballing here, but here's how i'd break it down.

Roissy style game
- "indirect" - not a true "where can I find this on the map", but not a "sup bitch, let's hit the hotel"
- takes into account the hamster and macro-factors
- focuses on a chicks weak points and insecurities
- uses a lot of dark triad stuff

To understand Roissy, it's useful to compare him with the other muscateers.

1) Roosh

We've seen Roosh approach on TV. He walks up, maybe asks a truly indirect question, rambles, and opens a girl up and feels her out. She looks up at him, starts to warm up a bit.... Wash, Rinse, Repeat.

If she's a bitch, unlike the typical PUA mantra, he's not above letting her have it, ideally in the most soul crushing way.

If successful, the Target will think that Roosh is this sexy and interesting guy, maybe have some fun with later, maybe not - she thinks it's up to her. She may even believe that this wonderful man just happened to fall into her life and it was kismet that they got together.

2) Virgle Kent

If you read Virgle Kent, he already has that intimidation factor - bald, black, built. Some Ukranian chick on U-street isn't going to buy him asking about a pet shop. She knows that a black guy stepping to her wants one thing. He may step to her with an indirect style - but it's one of those styles that is anything but indirect. It's an invitation for her to play along. But she might take note of his guns. He talks about having to show the contrast, he looks scary but he's actually a Teddy Bear. In this case, the Target is thinking fun and sexy, possibly charming rogue, and because of VK's sheer physicality, there's some natural submission going on.

3) Roissy
Roissy sees some young Republican Hill Staffer in some conservative Clarendon haunt, preferably from Utah, blonde, trim, probably some kind of policy wonk, but the good kind for him. I can't envision Roissy being as direct as VK, but He might not go indirect like Roosh. Roissy might throw out some "big bait" and get her to chime in. Once she does, the game is on.

He's going to look for an opening that will allow him to get her to start jumping through hoops. Standard game stuff, but he's never going to let her catch the ball, not even once. His main thrust these past years is to dominate, dominate, dominate. Where Roosh and Virgle might do some true give and take, Roissy won't. He's trying to build in submissiveness and compliance from the very beginning. As far as I can tell, Roissy wouldn't cave man unless absolutely necessary.

From the target's perspective, this guy is fun and dangerous but in a sadistic way. She's going to be on that treadmill trying to seek his approval. He prides himself on mixing in fear and pleasure.

He does with minimal play-by-play action. He's aiming to get to the point where all he needs to do is give her "the look". She knows if she displeases him, there's going to be hell to pay. In some ways, at least by the way he writes, he's building some dependence/co-dependence into his chicks from day 1.

Where I think that VK doesn't necessarily want a subservient girl, and Roosh will take a naturally subservient one - both will replace rather than chase, Roissy will make a girl subservient.

I think Roissy, oddly enough, has a very pimp-like approach to the game. The goal doesn't even seem to be sex, but slavery.

___________________

These 3 represent 3 styles out of an infinite # of styles.

One can easily envision Tyler Durden, Style, Patrice O'Neal , Mystery, G-Manifesto, 50 Cent, Lil Wayne, Cristiano, Steve Harvey, Sammy the Bull Gravano, Tom Terreo, Indian Gurus, the dudes @ Simple Pick Up and the fat Arab would all do this differently and successfully.

I say that because you don't necessarily need to take the "dark triad" approach to pick up. There are lots of ways to skin a cat.

Indeed, I much prefer the style currently advocated here on this forum....call it lifestyle game, or abundance game - but essentially you present a girl with a guy so awesome and his world is so awesome - she's dying to get into it. You're flipping the game and actually trying to disqualify her (not a fake disqualification to build attraction). In terms of actual pick up, it's the standard " see a chick, step up, spit at her" - but a lot of the heavy lifting that you're doing is in building an awesome life.

WIA

Post: #6

It's the same as all the game from the last 13 years. This is a newbie thread.

Post: #7

(06-05-2013 11:07 PM)Therapsid Wrote:  

(06-05-2013 09:44 PM)Collapseofman Wrote:  Now I'm aging out of the college market (I'm 27 in a college town) and looking for a more mature approach to approaching.

First things first. You're 27 years old. You're not aging out of the college market. I just turned 33 and I pickup college chicks, and the same is true for other guys around here in their 30's. Five, ten years from now you'll regret that you prematurely took upon yourself the mantle of maturity. You're younger than you think.

WURD. +1000

So very very true. DO NOT get into the mode I did in my early to mid-30s where I thought 'I'm older now, it's time to grow up, get married & settle down, I'm too old for these college or mid-20s girls, etc.". That's crap, and is what society tells you and what everyone wants you to believe, but it severly cramps your dating abilities, not to mention your game & style.

I'll admit the above is tough to do in the US, especially when all your friends are getting hitched, and many girls who are even 5-8 years younger than you act like u are 'creepy' or 'cradle robber.' But seriously, don't limit your options...stay young and fit too and you can date them into your 40s even I'd say.

Post: #8

Therapsid -- Yeah, I agree. I try to fuck an 18 year old every year to stay current, but 21/22 is the bottom of my food pyramid. I'm not aging out of the market, but I'm aging out of high-energy, Tyler Durden style game, and don't go to clubs enough to justify maturing into that Cosy shit that was popular a few years ago. I'm aging out of approaching college girls as peers and that calls for a different approach.


WIA -- That's very helpful. I know it's iconoclast to say that any woman's id really differs from the basic template of submissive hypergamy, but to what degree do you think the approach relies on screening for the vulnerable -- and do you think this selects for attractive women, but screens out the 10s? That's been my experience, but there's always room for improvement.

Akula: Yeah, I know. My mom married at 35, dad is still single but has kids from 3 different wives....I feel no pressure to settle down and I look young enough to pull it off. I never even get creeper vibes but that could be thanks to social proof.

Post: #9

Quote:Therapsid -- Yeah, I agree. I try to fuck an 18 year old every year to stay current, but 21/22 is the bottom of my food pyramid. I'm not aging out of the market, but I'm aging out of high-energy, Tyler Durden style game, and don't go to clubs enough to justify maturing into that Cosy shit that was popular a few years ago. I'm aging out of approaching college girls as peers and that calls for a different approach.

Im 29 and 95% of my lays have been age 18-22. The oldest girl I have been with was 25 and her pussy was so loose I swore I would never bang a girl that "old" again. You don't need high energy, you don't need any kind of gimmick at all to get a young girl. I don't go to clubs and neither does Gio who is our resident expert at banging younger pussy. I find as they get older it gradually takes more effort to get the girl and not the other way around like you describe.

If you don't want to bang younger girls anymore because you don't find them attractive then that is a different story. To me it sounds like your just making silly excuses.

Post: #10

(06-06-2013 07:30 AM)Collapseofman Wrote:  Therapsid -- Yeah, I agree. I try to fuck an 18 year old every year to stay current, but 21/22 is the bottom of my food pyramid. I'm not aging out of the market, but I'm aging out of high-energy, Tyler Durden style game, and don't go to clubs enough to justify maturing into that Cosy shit that was popular a few years ago. I'm aging out of approaching college girls as peers and that calls for a different approach.

Who says that you have to treat college age girls as peers? A lot of them like older guys and you are just throwing away that advantage. I've banged several girls this year who are more than 20 years younger than me and you think girls who are 18-21 are too young for you? I agree with Jaylow sounds like you're just making excuses because you've accepted the ridiculous American prejudice against male female age differences

And who says you have to use RSD style game or go to clubs to bang them either?

Quote:Posted by Jaylow - Today 09:54 AM

Im 29 and 95% of my lays have been age 18-22. The oldest girl I have been with was 25 and her pussy was so loose I swore I would never bang a girl that "old" again.

I've banged a much wider age range than you and I can tell you that pussy tightness has little, if anything, to do with age. I banged a chick in her 40s not long ago and her pussy was so tight I could barely get it in. She had never given birth. I would say the factors are:

Whether or not and how often she has vaginally delivered a baby

Her individual genetics- you cannot tell this by her body style-Ive banged skinny chicks with loose pussies and thick chicks with tight ones and vice versa

Her height-smaller chicks tend to be tighter and taller ones looser, although there are exceptions

Her race- Asians are almost always tight, with black chicks tending to be looser, with whites in the middle

How often she gets fucked and the size of the penis doing the fucking

How often she uses sex toys and the size of the sex toys. I think this is often a bigger factor than penis size-some chicks like really big dildos and it stretches them out

Post: #11

Let me simplify it in two words. All these bullshit techniques of disinterest and 1/3 texts and alpha maleness Et boil down to on thing.

Frame control.

You control the frame

You have game that is universal.

I realized this recently.

The primary of all game is frame control.

Post: #12

(06-06-2013 12:32 AM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  I think Roissy, oddly enough, has a very pimp-like approach to the game. The goal doesn't even seem to be sex, but slavery.

Hence the moniker.

Post: #13

Interesting. I've fucked 4 philippinas, all around 5'2, all with loose vaginas. Never been with a straight asian before, so can't compare. The tightest do kegels, though.

--

Enough with the college replies. No, I'm not going to stop fucking 21 year olds. I'm looking for a different approach to pulling since I'm too old to use the flirty, RSD, party guy approach. I like the sheer amount of control that comes along with the CH style, but don't understand how you achieve that in the early stages of pickup. I only know how to implement it with girls I'm already fucking.

Post: #14

Become familiar with a prominent poster that has similar interests to you and follow what he says. I have been using some of Giovonny's lines for the past few months to great success and he likes the same age group as I do.

The "approach" thread is usually on the front page and is probably the most informative thread we have on here. There are no "tricks" or set ways to do things. Its just regular dudes who talk to a lot of girls and share their experiences.

Quote:But for years now, his focus has been more on reforming male identity than on specific pickup procedure.

I have a hard time envisioning cold approaches going well with an attitude of aloof indifference

The "PUA" culture is dying. You cant get by with those little tricks anymore. The reason why he and RVF focus on strengthening the male identity is because most men have stopped acting like men somewhere along the way. The best "pickup procedure" is being a real man inside and out and undoing what society and mass media have brainwashed us into becoming.

It's too hard to fake something your not. Focusing on yourself should be your first priority, not becoming someone else.

Post: #15

RSD has nothing to do with party guy or whatever guy or any kind of specific style. As for your question, to me it's possible to look at it in two ways...

1. non neediness - not needing girls reactions to game them. in practice it means that flirting/leading/escalating itself makes you happy. whatever happens you maintain your good mood. when a girl hits you with some mega bomb shittest you're not affected cause it just adds more to the vibe. it's like her reaction is a ball [of emotion] coming at you that you can return to her ie you laugh it off or mock her or change the topic or exaggerate to amp it even more etc. it's high status as fuck when you're that centered. and a girl feels stripped off her whole girl power since you're like a host of your own party just welcoming sharing spreading. that's how game looks like when [for whatever reason] you're already happy on your own and you just celebrate. you don't need nothing from nobody just having a good time and that's when you're so attractive then.

2. indifference - think of it like the approach is like nobody is approaching nobody. two strangers meet. your nobody to her and she's nobody to you. so indifference is given since there is no real reason to care too much about that random girl. now it's fine to appreciate/dismiss something about her you see/hear but she's still nobody to you. so the vibe is you're interested yet skeptic. even though you're the one making effort to meet each other your frame immediately force her to prove herself to you. you question her as much as you praise her. in short, curiosity.

those are principles, not abc methods. which means you can be high energy/low energy or aloof/engaging or friendly/intense. whatever fits you best. the common denominator those two is BEING CAREFREE. you're carefree cause you don't need a girl. you're carefree cause you're indifferent toward random girl.

at least that's how i understand it

Post: #16

(06-06-2013 01:00 PM)XXL Wrote:  RSD has nothing to do with party guy or whatever guy or any kind of specific style. As for your question, to me it's possible to look at it in two ways...

1. non neediness - not needing girls reactions to game them. in practice it means that flirting/leading/escalating itself makes you happy. whatever happens you maintain your good mood. when a girl hits you with some mega bomb shittest you're not affected cause it just adds more to the vibe. it's like her reaction is a ball [of emotion] coming at you that you can return to her ie you laugh it off or mock her or change the topic or exaggerate to amp it even more etc. it's high status as fuck when you're that centered. and a girl feels stripped off her whole girl power since you're like a host of your own party just welcoming sharing spreading. that's how game looks like when [for whatever reason] you're already happy on your own and you just celebrate. you don't need nothing from nobody just having a good time and that's when you're so attractive then.

2. indifference - think of it like the approach is like nobody is approaching nobody. two strangers meet. your nobody to her and she's nobody to you. so indifference is given since there is no real reason to care too much about that random girl. now it's fine to appreciate/dismiss something about her you see/hear but she's still nobody to you. so the vibe is you're interested yet skeptic. even though you're the one making effort to meet each other your frame immediately force her to prove herself to you. you question her as much as you praise her. in short, curiosity.

those are principles, not abc methods. which means you can be high energy/low energy or aloof/engaging or friendly/intense. whatever fits you best. the common denominator those two is BEING CAREFREE. you're carefree cause you don't need a girl. you're carefree cause you're indifferent toward random girl.

at least that's how i understand it

I like your broad understanding of internal satisfaction as a principle of seduction, however that is not how heartiste conceptualizes or teaches his ideas.

He is very specific and adament about confidence itself being the root of all attraction, that all attributes boil down to and can be replaced by confidence, and that the dictionary definition of being aloof is a core principle of attraction. The dangers in his engaging prose are that he downplays building up anything other than narcissistic charisma and he has little place in his scheme of things for non-charismatic hypergamous value, plus he discounts non-narcissistic masculine development, plus he subtly encourages anhedonia.

He shows no grasp of using bonding emotions to enslave a girl, and shows no signs of having such emotions to be able to use.

Although he is a founding father with vast insights, in many ways his water of life is toxic.

******
a·loof
/əˈlo͞of/
Adjective

Not friendly or forthcoming; cool and distant.
Conspicuously uninvolved and uninterested, typically through distaste.

Synonyms
remote - distant

Post: #17

Heartiste imagines that sociopathic anhedonia, or emotional color blindness, is not a deficit of ability but a freedom from disability.

In that he is deliberately ignorant and leading people astray. It is not subtle the damage he is causing.

Post: #18

(06-06-2013 11:32 AM)Collapseofman Wrote:  -
I like the sheer amount of control that comes along with the CH style, but don't understand how you achieve that in the early stages of pickup.

Fisto already told you. Frame control

Post: #19

(06-06-2013 07:30 AM)Collapseofman Wrote:  WIA -- That's very helpful. I know it's iconoclast to say that any woman's id really differs from the basic template of submissive hypergamy, but to what degree do you think the approach relies on screening for the vulnerable -- and do you think this selects for attractive women, but screens out the 10s? That's been my experience, but there's always room for improvement.

1) Screening for the vulnerable?

If you ever get a chance to study pimp game, one of the most surprising things that a pimp will do is turn out his square girl friend. She has her head on straight, but she's in love with her man, and she'll do anything for him, including selling her body.

Every chick is vulnerable, because at the core level, every person is vulnerable. Anyone can get got. Most of us are falling for something right now. (consider your school and career versus what you really want to do)

At the micro-level, I know I've had my head bent by some chick, and I usually see all the angles.

2) Screens out 10s -

Anyone can be manipulated.

More importantly, don't let your subjective judgment of a chick's overall attractiveness suddenly imbue her with super powers.

She's not smarter than other chicks. And in some cases, a chick can be some physically intimidating, she will have less experience handling random dudes who spit some game at her. Her busty friend who hits the club all the time will be much more savvy in terms of dealing with men.

WIA

Post: #20

(06-07-2013 12:48 AM)WestIndianArchie Wrote:  

(06-06-2013 07:30 AM)Collapseofman Wrote:  WIA -- That's very helpful. I know it's iconoclast to say that any woman's id really differs from the basic template of submissive hypergamy, but to what degree do you think the approach relies on screening for the vulnerable -- and do you think this selects for attractive women, but screens out the 10s? That's been my experience, but there's always room for improvement.

1) Screening for the vulnerable?

If you ever get a chance to study pimp game, one of the most surprising things that a pimp will do is turn out his square girl friend. She has her head on straight, but she's in love with her man, and she'll do anything for him, including selling her body.

Every chick is vulnerable, because at the core level, every person is vulnerable. Anyone can get got. Most of us are falling for something right now. (consider your school and career versus what you really want to do)

At the micro-level, I know I've had my head bent by some chick, and I usually see all the angles.

2) Screens out 10s -

Anyone can be manipulated.

More importantly, don't let your subjective judgment of a chick's overall attractiveness suddenly imbue her with super powers.

She's not smarter than other chicks. And in some cases, a chick can be some physically intimidating, she will have less experience handling random dudes who spit some game at her. Her busty friend who hits the club all the time will be much more savvy in terms of dealing with men.

WIA

High level stuff.

Post: #21

I've found a mixture of lifestyle game and roissy game tend to set up a perfect mix for women. A lot of women really dig that "50 Shades of Grey" guy where a billionaire makes the woman attracted on career and lifestyle excellence alone. Bring in the dominance once they've been lured into your bedroom.

Ironically, the ones that fall for this the most are .... the feminist variety. I'll spit shit like, "Yeah i like guns, red meat, and driving big cars." Some women are repulsed by it .... and yet are intensely attracted. It's not perfect, but it works most of the time.

Post: #22

Solid advice, from everyone. Opened a handful of sets over yesterday and had mixed success. I guess what I'm getting at is:

Someone said above that RSD game isn't necessarily "party guy" game. But when you start talking about "giving value" and "spreading positive emotions", 90% of people would read that as being outgoing, sociable, in a good mood, and spreading that around. Sounds a lot like a "party guy" to me.

Roissy preaches aloof indifference, and hits on being "laconic" and "non-reactive." Girls get wet for pure dominance in the short term and the dread of losing you in the long term. My question is, in your experience, what does that mean for your self-presentation? Frame control is the essence of game -- what does your frame look like when you take this route?

Because when I kept these things in mind, it was hard not to default to being detached and disinterested. To coming off as bored and boring. I was more critical. I ask about screening, because I got one number, and it was from a girl who responded well -- but really gave off "daddy issue" vibes. I'm having a hard time figuring out how to be engaging while acting indifferent.

Thanks again. I've been at this a while; I know how to do it one way. Just trying to learn a different language, so to speak.

Post: #23

waiting now for all the posts that explain how aloof doesn't really mean aloof, how laconic doesn't really mean laconic, and how indifferent doesn't really mean indifferent. How Roissy game is all deep code for something more sublime than what the words point to, and how it isn't a life recipe for anhedonia.

Post: #24

@xsplat- Roissy's game isnt for everybody and considering the context and location (USA) I would say its quite applicable. That being said, you are right in a way. The flip is that a problem can be tackled differently. You advocate one way, Roissy another, Roosh yet another.

Nobody is right or wrong. Its just different. People who are inexperienced read too much into it. But some degree of experimentation+ calibration+ reflection is needed to fully develop as a person. Treat their viewpoints as paint that you throw on a sexual canvass. See what sticks...

Heres how I saw Roissy- Intelligent, Sharp, Young Silver-tongued White Dude.

Things I can learn: Quick and Witty Responses, Outcome Independence, Respect for biomechanics/social dynamics- instinct trumps logic often, Razor sharp social calibration.
Things I would keep in mind- Jaded viewpoint. Purely Americanized game.

Is there any doubt he's intelligent? No
Is there any doubt that he does well w/women? No
Does he say his life is for everybody? No

No issue for me. Its his personal opinions. As for the anhedonia, its a version of the choice paradox+ instant gratification syndrome. So much to choose from and instanteous results leave one un-fulliflled. A true irony- the more you have, the less you enjoy (beyond a certain point).

Post: #25

DVY, it may be true that some people have some flavors of dark triad combinations that are relatively fixed, and for whom movement away into other ways of viewing life are unlikely.

However I think most of us are more fluid and have personalities that are more trainable.

Roissy's entire world is explained within a dard triad framework. This framework is not as happy and content as other frameworks. Therefore if maximizing life satisfaction is peoples general aim, then most people will be harmed in their general life aim by following into and being captivated by the gravity of Roissy's frame.