My general disdain for PUAs has a long and textured history, as any reader of my far more complete (and mirrored) OG blog will know (see link at the top of my blog here on the desktop version).
The principles on which this was based were multifaceted, but in the main had to do with the fact that:
- Most of them were nowhere near as successful with women as they pretended
- They were/are essentially predators (of other men’s wallets) on top of being mostly bullshitters
- The entire premise of their supposed existence was so flawed even from a secularist perspective, and I knew this when I was essentially a pretty hedonist secularist myself
- While I was no stranger to women, and in fact I genuinely “outperformed” many PUAs in terms of how often and with what quality of woman I ended up in bed, along with a frequency of rotation of new ones that became noticeable enough for random neighbours, the local shop owner, friends from training, co-workers and even the occasional random strangers to comment on, it was never so impersonal or about raising my “notch” number. And in the overwhelming majority of cases there was always some very positive outcome even if at times the interaction was rather superficial. I mean, I indulged in situations that make the average porn-film script seem like gritty realism of documentary level plausibility. But the point is that the relation was never so psychopathic as to not consider the woman involved as a fully living creature with a value as a human being. Many PUAs not only pretended to be coldly calculating psychos that only wanted to “raise their number”, a few may even have been that, but worse, they were teaching already desperate men to model themselves as such. Perpetuating an artificiality between men and women that is entirely negative at every level, regardless of if they got laid or not.
Now we have an older, French equivalent of a PUA on substack, making some posts that at least have a slightly more erudite use of language and appear to at least describe some of the observations of modern dating life with a certain level of accuracy, if not necessarily any solutions, such as this piece .
His approach is at least somewhat more educated, and I have not researched him enough to know if he sells courses, gives subs only “advice on how to get laid”, or if he is just dispensing generalities of observations concerning women as his way to help young men. But whatever it is, it still has that veneer of a structural lie.
Not in that I think he is intentionally trying to deceive, necessarily (as I said, I would need to read a lot more of him to have an opinion on him, and frankly, I am not going to have the time or inclination to do so. His writing, while competent, is not enticing enough on its own merits, and the subject matter is uninteresting to me, having navigated in that ocean —of a pussy-hunter (as one ex referred to me)— long ago now and having left it behind in favour of my wife and now rather numerous children.
What I see though is still a very subtle, but damaging, plastic layer of falsehood over the entire topic.
He speaks of numbers and percentages and so on, and I am sure they are probably all accurate, or accurate enough, but that is still missing the point.
You, the reader, are not a mere statistic. But being treated like one, being spoken of as if you were one, being taught to see the world that way, you will have a tendency to become one.
Where is the healthy advice? Where is the:
This is the shitshow and its pitfalls… now here are the solutions.
The second part is entirely missing.
I do have young men email me and ask for advice, and where I can I provided it, to as far as I know only decent results. It’s why I wrote Caveman Theory , so I wouldn’t have to repeat myself endlessly at least on the fundamentals.
The point is each person IS unique.
And all the statistics in the world don’t mean anything if you learn to first of all know yourself, and secondly, observe reality as it is, not as you wish it were, and adapt yourself accordingly.
PUAs, and losers in general, complain and decry the limited advice what they claim “naturals” (men successful with women who have never entertained a PUA product in their life) give. Usually because it boils down to “just be yourself.”
The goblins complain because they firstly misunderstand what this means and how the “natural” intends it, and secondly because if they did understand it, they would be outraged at the inescapable consequence of that very understanding; that is: drastic acceptance of who you really are first, followed by conscious endeavour to become who you wish to be.
Goblins hate mirrors for a reason, after all.
And if you are a goblin, becoming a goblin cool enough human females want to be with you is hard work. And Elf females will still be out of reach. So… yeah… just be yourself!
Which means:
- Know yourself (based in reality, not delusion)
- Deal with objective reality (not your delusions or desires)
- Adapt accordingly
- Become the best you can be with what you have
- Play in your own range
I literally know men that are physically deformed and are nevertheless happily married.
Not to supermodels, to be sure. But married and happy nonetheless.
So if those guys can do it, you really have no excuse.
Well… you know… except for all the statistics and black pill vibe all over the internet and from the latest iteration of PUAs.
French ones at that.
This post was originally published on my Substack. Link here
