How Seduce With Style

“And BTW this new look cost barely nothing!”

I’d be interested to know how ‘almost nothing’ this outfit costed? I’m actually interested in doing something like this, my attitude might be “bad”, but people with bad attitudes still have green money, right?

haha oh cmon people take a joke.

“1. Grow “yourself”
2. Be yourself
3. Repeat as necessary.”

I’m sorry, so “growing” yourself means adopting a dress style that is something you’d normally not wear?

“Clothes do not make the man. They simply make the man noticeable.”

I’m not even sure what this means, obviously clothes don’t “make the man” in a literal sense, but isn’t the entire point of this post and this line of thinking that clothes are *reflectant* of a mans behavior and character?

Obviously no one is going to marry someone based on a single outfit, but the entire purpose of the post here (at least as i see it) is that the clothes a man wears reflects on his character, behavior.

Me, I personally could give two sh*ts about fashion, it’s quite possibly the most wasted effort the human mind can make, what is “style” really? Just a bunch of people following what a select few people say is “stylish” that’s about it. By having “style” you’re showing you know how to follow the crowd. whop-de-do.. great characteristic.

“Parkey can, obviously, correct me on this one since it’s what he said. But I took from it that he meant that you evolve as a person over time. And so does your style. ”

Evolution is a process of gradual change to suit environmental shifts (which in both physical and social cases, are small, well they have been for a long time anyway). On the one hand he’s making references to “grow yourself” but on the other hand he’s saying, “change yourself to get the results you want” like right here:

“Make the effort to grow yourself, change things about yourself and by doing so have new kinds of experiences.”

“That’s dress well. As in: have a good sense of their own style. Not guys who simply copy what the guy in the photos is dressed in. Guys who discover and find what works for them style wise.”

That’s contradictory though, remember the episode of Seinfeld where George says, “I’d wear velvet if it were socially acceptable” That’s *exactly* what Im talking about, society tells you to “dress this way to be stylish” and you may/may not agree with that, but have to tow the line to get the result you want. It’s all perfectly valid advice. It’s just not ‘be yourself’

“But I say again: “clothes do not make the man”. If I put on a doctor’s coat, I am still not a doctor.”

No, but you can convince someone at a cursory level that you are. That’s the whole point. To give an impression of something, irrespective of what’s going on underneath the hood. Ever see “catch me if you can” or read the book? Frank Abagnale went to painstaking detail to obtain a pilots uniform to masquerade as a pilot.

When did I ever imply that putting on certain clothing will give you specific domain knowledge in a profession?!

“Same with a person’s style and clothing. They are tools of expression and communication.”

I’m not disputing any of this, but the crux of this post is, “dress such and such way to communicate and express such and such things about your sexual ‘fitness’ level so to speak. Ie, how you’d be a good boyfriend.

and THAT is not ( at least in my view) reconcilable with the advice of “be yourself”

“Nobody here is claiming that simply wearing those clothes will make all women love you.”

Let’s quantify it. How important is it, on a scale of 1 to 10? It’s certainly important enough to warrant mentioning on a post, right?

‘But if a guy can find something stylish to wear that he feels comfortable in and he feels is authentic to him and his personality, then he’s made an improvement in one thing that has an influence over how attractive he might be.’

Stylish = something that someone else dictated is ‘the right thing to wear’

What I’m getting from this discussion is:

“Grow yourself to change your authentic feeling regarding clothing and style to match socially defined norms of what ‘attractive style’ is – and you’ll attract women, or at least be more noticeable”

I’ve ‘peacocked’ like this many times, but my internal comfort level with it was 0, because I looked like a friggin clown or a reject from the smooth criminal video.

“Evolution is a process of gradual change to suit environmental shifts”.

The human being evolves rapidly compared to evolution in other contexts. We have limited life spans. And yet we change so much within those limited life spans. We go from childhood to teenager to adult hood. Our bodies change, our voices change, our likes and dislikes change. We are an evolving, varying system.

“That’s contradictory though, remember the episode of Seinfeld where George says, “I’d wear velvet if it were socially acceptable”

I never watched Seinfeld.

“That’s *exactly* what Im talking about, society tells you to “dress this way to be stylish” and you may/may not agree with that, but have to tow the line to get the result you want. It’s all perfectly valid advice. It’s just not ‘be yourself’”

Society didn’t tell the guy to dress that way. He had a consultation with a stylist and found some clothes that suited him. That’s not society dictating anything. Nobody is suggesting that the way the guy looks now is the only way you should look if you want to get women. It’s just that the new look suits him.

“No, but you can convince someone at a cursory level that you are. That’s the whole point. To give an impression of something, irrespective of what’s going on underneath the hood. Ever see “catch me if you can” or read the book? Frank Abagnale went to painstaking detail to obtain a pilots uniform to masquerade as a pilot.”

Yes, getting a pilots uniform is a good way to masquerade as a pilot. But if you can’t fly a plane, wearing a pilots uniform won’t stop you from being noticed for the con man you happen to be.

As I said before, clothes can communicate certain things by themselves. But most of the time they are simply communication tools for people to use to express themselves.

“I’m not disputing any of this, but the crux of this post is, “dress such and such way to communicate and express such and such things about your sexual ‘fitness’ level so to speak. Ie, how you’d be a good boyfriend.

and THAT is not ( at least in my view) reconcilable with the advice of “be yourself””

The guy went to see a stylist and got a look that suits him. To my knowledge, he’s not been ordered or compelled to wear anything he’s not comfortable with. It is him being himself. He was involved in choosing the clothes.

I can’t speak for all men or the guy in the pictures but if I am paying for a style makeover, I’m darn sure gonna come out of it with clothes I feel comfortable wearing.

“Let’s quantify it. How important is it, on a scale of 1 to 10? It’s certainly important enough to warrant mentioning on a post, right?”

I don’t know how important it is. Women vary. What they find attractive varies. There could be women who had sexual fetishes for the way the guy used to look. Who knows. Point is, the guy found a look that suits him.

“Stylish = something that someone else dictated is ‘the right thing to wear’”

The guy met with a stylist and found a look that suited him. I’m guessing he was involved with choosing the clothes so he’s not being dictated to. If I get advice from the barbers about good haircuts am I being dictated to or made to have a certain haircut? No. I’m simply getting advice from people who know what they are talking about so I can make some informed decisions for myself about my look.

This whole thing is about someone being themselves. Nobody forced this guy into making some changes. He found a look that suited him.

I’m obviously guessing about this and the guy himself is more than welcome to correct me but my guess is he was not forced or dictated to to wear anything.

By the way, I do have anecdotal experience, I’ve done the whole “ask a female friend to go shopping with me thing” I’ve come out spending ridiculous amounts of money, like $75-$100 for a single outfit, and buying clothes that I thought to myself, “who am I kidding” all this because I was in a state of fear, that if i didn’t follow this advice, I wouldn’t get laid.

It’s like the Fahrenheit 9/11 trailer tells us: you can make people do anything if they’re afraid.

“Act out of love, not fear.”

Thats like telling a homeless person, act out of abundance, not poverty.

Sounds like a nice thing to say, but for some it’s just not reality.

I’d say fear drives 99.9% of everyone’s decisions. Why go to school? for fear of not going to college. Why go to college? for fear of not getting a job. Why get a job? for fear of not making $$. Why make $$ for fear of not being able to live and get girls…

I’d say it works the same for women. Why spend so much time on looks, makeup, fashion.. for fear of not being able to get a guy.

I’d like someone to come on here and tell me this isn’t true.

“Poor people are poor because they act out of scarcity, rich people are rich because they act out of abundance?”

Ok, we definitely have a romney supporter in the house here.

“Who you are evolves and changes over time.”

That’s obvious. but at any given moment who you are is fixed, and the actions you take can potentially be incongruent with “who you are”

‘who you are’ is a vague term.

“Word of advice: don’t call me ignorant. I took the time to answer your points with respect. Show me the same respect or we’re done talking.”

I wasn’t calling you ignorant, I was saying you were ignoring the context. which you were, and apparently are continuing to do.

Of course one can decide to take advice or not. No one’s putting a gun to anyone’s head. You’re stating clearly obvious things.

“With respect, you’re only getting conflicting advice because you keep misinterpreting the advice given. You think the advice on this blog post is: “change your behaviour and style to match a social norm”. It’s not. The guy had a style consultation. He found a new way to express HIMSELF through new clothing he felt comfortable in.”

Like I said, I can’t speak for him, and nor can you. If he in a fraction of a second was able to say, “ok now THIS set of clothing is ME” and it happen to match a social norm, then BULLY for him.

as far as me wearing clothes like that (on a daily basis) it’s basically “change your behavior to match a social norm”

one of the other women said something about “not everyone having aesthetics” I dont have them, nor do I care about them. Yet everyone keeps saying we live in a world where we must care about them.

“Fair enough. But that was your decision. Your decision to take her advice. Your decision to spend that much. Your decision to act as if your female friend knew what all women everywhere will find attractive.”

Ok, I’m sorry but you are just being very naive and ignoring everything I say. Haven’t you ever struggled over a decision in life? Have you ever made a decision you later regretted? Do you not understand the concept of fear driving decisions. YES they were my decisions, but they were made from a FEAR-driven state.

What in your view is “changing who you are” if it’s not changing behavior, visible clothing (and looks in general).. ?

Skw,

“Be yourself” means talking to a woman, the same way you talk to your family and close friends.

Sometimes you have to do things that make you feel uncomfortable to move ahead like changing careers/job. Changing the state where you live, Dating after a divorce ect..

SkW

Talk to women, how you talk to all of us here on this forum, You’ll get laid in no time!

Glad I could help.

If, to you, women are simply the obstacle standing between you and sex I feel sorry for you.

I disagree with the notion that you should talk to women just like family and friends. Talk to attractive women as people you want to have sex with, but also with respect and empathy. Women will receive such admiration gratefully as the gift that it is as long as you don’t act as though you have some concealed agenda, as long as you aren’t trying to take something from her.

Abundance behaviour; generosity; not trying to acquire women or sex as a beggar would with spare change.

Then all of a sudden from nowhere there’s a gorgeous woman tapping you on the shoulder asking you to dance. You take her hand, she’s looking at you like a lustful rabbit in headlights, and you’re thinking “that’s it? It’s that easy?!” This happened to me on Sunday. Tell that to the me of two years ago and I just wouldn’t have believed it!

“Women will receive such admiration gratefully as the gift that it is as long as you don’t act as though you have some concealed agenda, as long as you aren’t trying to take something from her.”

This reminds me of the Chris Rock joke, “any time a man’s being nice to a woman, all he’s doing is offering dick. Can I get that for you? How bout some dick? Can I help you with that? Can I help you to some DICK? Do you need some DICK? ”

check it out:

http://youtu.be/XMiyg87UhL4

Your point is taken, there’s a difference between “hey bitch I wanna FUCK your hot pussy get the FUCK over here now” and “you’re very attractive, I was hoping to go home with you tonight” or some variant.

“Not what I said. I said needy is getting ATTACHED to the outcome.”

What do you mean by ‘getting attached’ and how is that different than “adding value” I think you’re level of attachment is commensurate to the level of value you ascribe.

For example, oxygen and water, are pretty valuable to us, we’d die without them, we’re also pretty attached to them. Of course this is a physiological attachment, not a psychological one.

Attaching yourself to something means assigning value to it. I don’t see any difference.

“but remain DETACHED in the here and now. Loose the imperative of securing it right here, right now.”

In my view you cannot detach yourself from something but also ascribe it value (as you say to). The two are one and the same. As soon as you ascribe value to something, you are attaching yourself to it. in some small way.

“My personal experience is that the moment you stop needing external results is the moment you start getting them.

Having crossed that threshold myself I can say it is completely possible.”

Well I disagree. I’d say you haven’t experienced the level of failure that some other of us have. You never answered my earlier question. How can one “not need” something, but still attach value to it?

“You know nothing about my life or what I’ve endured.”

You’re absolutely right, I don’t. But neither you know mine. But the most I can do is speculate based on the things you say.

“I’m not going to explain the want/need distinction for you again. It is an enormously powerful concept, but no use if you don’t want to understand it.”

That distinction is clear, but irrelevant to me. I’m talking about the value/attachment question, you see them as distinct, I’m seeing them as proportionate ( the more you value something, the more attached you are to it – whether you call that ‘want’ or ‘need’ is immaterial, since I’m going straight to the attachment concept) Yet somehow you can value something without being attached to it. And I say if you don’t have some attachment, you’re not really valuing it.

“Attachment is fear. Fear that you can’t get or keep what you want, that you will lose it.”

That still doesn’t answer the question about value. You’re saying to not value things I want to acquire, yet by definition if I want to acquire something it implies it has value.

Asking someone to not value what they want to acquire is like asking someone to not screech in pain when their pain nerve endings are triggered.

“Think “wow you are beautiful, I’m really enjoying talking to you”, not “I’m afraid I might lose this chance so I need to secure your phone number/a date/sex””

I have done that already. Quite well, but adopting a false belief of “I might lose this chance so I need to secure your phone number/a date/sex…” is only temporary, because truthfully that IS what I want.

I’ve heard of this “abundance” thinking before, and I don’t agree with what I’ve read thus far. Consider this situation, you want hersheys chocolate, and none of the stores in your area have it, they have skittles all over the place. Thinking to yourself “ah well, at least I have skittles, I’m going to value that !” doesn’t solve your hershey’s deficiency problem. Especially if everyone around you has hershey’s but you don’t.

Proving that Person A has it “worse” than Person B in the area of meeting women is basically a hiding to nonsense.

The scientists that have studied attraction/the dating scene have found out a lot of stuff. Their studies suggest lots of things. But they readily admit that too many variables exist for them to make fully accurate predictions or objectively prove anything in this area.

Given that, it logically follows that attempting to prove that Person A has things harder than Person B (in the area of meeting women) would not be possible.

Terms have not been defined. We don’t know what “harder” actually is or refers to. We don’t have a big enough sample size. We have to acknowledge the fact that human beings vary and so do the advantages and disadvantages that we’re born with and those we pick up along the way.

You could try to argue that someone who was not born “good looking” has it harder (when meeting women) then someone who was born “good looking”. Some studies suggest that sexual attraction is mainly looks based, decided upon in seconds and that personality/confidence doesn’t really figure or have the power to change things (with one two exceptions).

However, those same studies revealed that getting a style makeover has the potential to raise your “looks score” by three, four or even five points depending upon the guy and how much the style suits the guy and conveys certain things about the guy.

Height was shown to play a big role in attraction so you could argue that being an average tall guy is better than being a short supermodel.

Other studies have highlighted the power of things like “the halo effect” in attraction. This is where one aspect of a person outshines other aspects and draws people to them. This can be looks but it can be attitude, personality etc and scientific evidence backs this up.

Then there’s the voice tone studies that suggest that voice has a powerful impact on how attractive we perceive someone to be. Your voice can, it is suggested, even alter people’s perceptions of your looks.

There’s also scientific evidence to suggest that women have “types” of guys that they like physically and generally. Which means conventional good looks would not hold up well against a guy who happened to fit that girl’s “type”.

Advantages and disadvantages vary, people vary and there’s enough scientific data out there to suggest that people can compensate for all manner of disadvantages if needs be .

I know one guy who suffers from a genetic condition that, for want of better terms, made a mess of his face. He’s dating a beautiful young blonde girl.

We are not in control of some things in life and we are in control of other things. However, if we argue for and support our perceived limitations, they grow in their power.

Even if you could objectively prove that you have it harder than other people, it would serve no real purpose. There’s a huge difference between acknowledging limitations and worshipping them

Arguing in support of a limitation or perceived limitation/insecurity makes no logical sense and is like handing a loaded gun to your worst enemy.

Maybe, if I’d been better looking, things would have worked out with the girl I loved and I would have ended up happy. Who knows? But if I wallow in that kind of thinking then I’ll drown.

Whatever my advantages and disadvantages, I’ve proved I can fight and make changes. Whether it’s in life in general or with meeting women. I’ve been in relationships with women way out of my league. I went from being obese to people complimenting me on my looks and figure. I went through huge amounts of pain to change a noticeably deformed looking arm into something nobody notices when they see me.

I worked through and got rid of a nasty case of depression and even some self hatred too. All of these things hindered my ability to meet and date women and I worked through and got rid of most of them.

Maybe some guys have it easier. Or maybe those guys worked out that wallowing in worries about yourself makes you come across as overly serious and a guy who can’t have fun. Maybe they worked out that a guy who is unsure of himself might come across to women as creepy. Who knows?

As guys, we can either get cross and worship our perceived limitations. Or we can get out there, put across our best selves and see what happens. I’ve have long periods of thinking I’m ugly as sin. And I have long periods of girls sending me text messages calling me “sexy”. So you never know.

“well how are you going to accomplish this task?”

that wasn’t the question asked, the question was how will I know when I’ve succeeded.

If you dress to look like a person of value that is how the women you come across will respond to you.

When you obviously take pride in the way you present yourself to the world women do turn their heads and take notice. I experienced this myself when I left my old jeans and a t-shirt phase behind. Women smile at me now. And when they’re smiling at you “Hi, how are you?” is much easier.

This even works with my waistcoats, of which Marni is not a fan. Must be a British thing.

So sure don’t make the effort when you go out, but don’t then complain when the cute girl behind you in line at the supermarket doesn’t notice you exist.

Guys and Marni,

Ive whizzed through all of this. Too many people get caught up in the argument maybe in fear of reality.

In her mind, Marni was not hot when she was young in southern ontario (and people, remember southern ontario, due to its eastern europeanorigin is FULL of 11/10s, so maybe Marni was cute as a teenager but felt the competition). The current version of Marni which is hot in every way will go for a less hot man if his charisam makes up for it. Thats a truth but also an IF.

Parkey I’m sure is the Northamptonshire boy from the next level group who Ive invited to my house in March 2010 – think his real name is John Trench. He is so keen on imporvement yet doesnt understand so VILIFIES SKW’s apparently negative attitude. Not helpful to anyone.

Kevin is honest. He acknowledges looks matter. He gets a lot. Yet sarcasm and irnoy are a great thing, but he applies them hurtfully.

And SKW, I will actually have a go at you. And this is hard for me but I think I need to. I like your honesty, I agree with your reality but take a fuckign step off the negativity. Ill dirnk with you ANYTIME to frustration but lets at least TRY to make some inroads. PLLLLLEAAASE? Give Parkey adn Kevin and Marni an inch. Okay if they take a mile, kill ‘em LOL but try to give them an inch, just to see something. I never thought Id say this about anyone but youre TOO jaded!

Yeah skw thats a fair response. And I get your point that its psychologically almost impossible to ignore facts.

SO yes ignore the facts. I had continual hot women “looks reject me” on badoo and got called “stygg” (ugly in norwegian) after one cock teased me for her own ego. I wasnt happy, I hurled abuse at these shallow b¤%&hes and am still hurt now. However I kept going and spent the last 50 hours with a reasonable looking polish girl with a hot body. Has that upped my general market vaule or confidence? NO. But its provided a welcome distraction which I wouldnt have achieved if I quit after the first 5-10. I actually cant deeal with hurt so i just stay up later and keep going. Until someone accepts me as good looking enough to chat. Pathetic really but it is a shallow world.

Marty is correct.

Skw yes I must be realistic and it has to be accepted that many women do judge on looks. What Marty said about some do and some dont is very important. Its exactly what Ive noticed and you cant blame the small per cent that give you a chance for the ones that dont. Its a hard lesson to learn but well worth it.

Life isnt fair and I sympathesise. It does take a thick skin and ignorance of facts to get in there. And yes while the generically hot have it easy. No arguments from me there.