PUA Forum :: Thoughts on 60 Years of Challenge's Anti-Manifesto

But I have a tough time seeing how any guy who is not particularly attractive can use 60's method to game an attractive girl who he has just met unless he opens his mouth and FIRST attracts her with his words... which is counter to the teachings of the 60 method.
-Mens Rea

dude, not sure if u can read but this is not the field report section. It's entitled "Approaching and Opening" and this thread has to do with approaching using 60's method, and under what situations I think it works and what it doesn't.Instead of aimlessly bashing threads you should try and post some original shit of your own or "GTFO" as you so eloquently put it.

ANY COMMENTS REGARDING YOUR OWN FIELD REPORTS?!!!

It's kind of sad but something I'm learning very quickly on this site is to keep thought provoking, and arguably controversial postings that promote healthy debate to myself... instead a "right on bro!!!" or "bros before hos!!" post gets you a lot more reputation points than something I would hope to encourage people to share their own stories/theories on.

Pimpington I agree with you on some respects. For example, just because a I find a girl more attractive doesnt mean she will find me less attractive, and vice versa.

However, the context of this discussion is specifically using 60's method of less is more, and noone seems to address this portion of my post.

In short, wouldn't you agree that the less attractive a guy is to a girl the more talking they have to do? And the more attractive a guy is to a girl the more successfully they can pull of the 60 method of simply building sexual tension?

That's it dude. That's my point. Thoughts on that please. Thx!

Quote:

Funnily I have used some of his ideas on guys to socialize myself more,

Dude I think his method is about not socializing yourself more...

Author:	mens rea [ Fri Aug 05, 2011 10:46 am ]
Post subject:	Thoughts on 60 Years of Challenge's Anti-Manifesto
So after reading and practicing 60 Year's Anti-Manifesto there are things about it that I think are a great contribution to PU and parts of it that are unfortunately somewhat misleading. First, let's start with what I deem the good... Don't sell yourself short. Essentially, don't forget that you are the prize. Yes, it's freaking possible that YOU--the man--can be the prize and not the girl. So act like it. Don't feel the need to break awkward, silent moments with stupid, random banter. If the girl likes you (we'll get to that MAJOR assumption in a second) there is no need to break the seemingly awkward moments, such as periods of silence between conversation. Instead, USE THEM TO YOUR ADVANTAGE! Yes! Crazy huh? Well, not really; it's actually intuitive. See, if a girl likes you, then she will desperately try to keep the conversation going and keep things "healthy" as she sees it, or is otherwise use to having it. That means that if you keep your eyes fixed on the girl, she will be the first to look away; if you stop the conversation, she will pick it back up; if you leave your hand on her shoulder a bit too long, she will brush it off only to get closer to you, etc. etc. However, this method makes an enormous assumption. It assumes that there actually IS sexual tension between two people. This is not always the case. Most commonly this sexual tension is not mutual when there is a disparity in the looks department between two people. Have you ever noticed how you get really nervous/anxious when a really attractive girl walks into the room? By contrast, have you noticed how you don't even notice, much less get nervous, when an unattractive girl walks into the same room? If an unattractive girl were to ask you if they could borrow your eraser would your heart rate increase? Probably not. In the same fashion, girls could give a shit less when they come into contact with men that they deem to be "beneath" them in terms of looks. Women get approached by men MUCH more often than men get approached by women. If anything, they are much more used to dealing with the pressures and anxiety of dealing with complete strangers of the opposite sex. Thus, unless the girl deems you to be at least as attractive as her, if not more, she will not feel any realistic amount of sexual tension just based off an initial encounter where no words have been exchanged. The 60 year method of "less is more" and the philosophy of letting the sexual tension do the work has a very practical, yet quite limited use. It is best used in my opinion once you know the girl is interested in you or at the very least is physically attracted to you. But I have a tough time seeing how any guy who is not particularly attractive can use 60's method to game an attractive girl who he has just met unless he opens his mouth and FIRST attracts her with his words... which is counter to the teachings of the 60 method. And for the record, I just want to clarify that I am very grateful for 60's teachings. I definitely have learned a lot from them and know when and where to apply them. And for that, thanks 60. -Mens Rea

Author:	lolaskate [ Fri Aug 05, 2011 11:06 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Thoughts on 60 Years of Challenge's Anti-Manifesto
Quote: But I have a tough time seeing how any guy who is not particularly attractive can use 60's method to game an attractive girl who he has just met unless he opens his mouth and FIRST attracts her with his words... which is counter to the teachings of the 60 method. -Mens Rea FR or GTFO

Author:	mens rea [ Fri Aug 05, 2011 11:17 am ]
Post subject:
dude, not sure if u can read but this is not the field report section. It's entitled "Approaching and Opening" and this thread has to do with approaching using 60's method, and under what situations I think it works and what it doesn't. Instead of aimlessly bashing threads you should try and post some original shit of your own or "GTFO" as you so eloquently put it.

Author:	pumpington [ Fri Aug 05, 2011 11:43 am ]
Post subject:
Quote: dude, not sure if u can read but this is not the field report section. It's entitled "Approaching and Opening" and this thread has to do with approaching using 60's method, and under what situations I think it works and what it doesn't.Instead of aimlessly bashing threads you should try and post some original shit of your own or "GTFO" as you so eloquently put it. you need to go test your theory, you can get a girl to like you as a person, and then try to pump her BT and create sexual tension, flip frames sexual, and do all this after getting comfort, or you can try to do that right away, being social to begin with can either improve your chances or hurt them, but over all, it is fairly irrelivant, and you are attractive as you are attractive, assuming some how that if a girl is more attractive, somehow that makes you less attractive to her is a stupid limiting belief, you are just as attractive to a hb10 as you are to a hb3, but everyone is unique and wants something elese, just like how some guys really like fat girls, not every guy does, but some do, one girls hotguy10 is another girls hotguy5, get out there and test your theory before saying it isn't practicle, most pua methods work as long as you apply confidence and escalate the situation, tired of seeing these WTF BAD ADVICE, THAT WONT WORK BULLSHIT, as long as you are ACTIVELY TRYING TO HAVE SEX, YOU ARE BEING PRODUCTIVE, GET OUT THERE, 60 years gives some good solid advice, try it out

Author:	mens rea [ Fri Aug 05, 2011 12:04 pm ]
Post subject:
Hey guys, actually this post comes from my experiences in the field using 60's method. I'm sorry if the word "think" threw some of you off... that's actually why I started off the post with "After reading and PRACTICING 60 Year's..." Anyway, yes my statements come from in field observations. As I posted in another thread I tried this technique with semi-cute to cute girls (6 - 7.5) and got disappointing results. Basically the overwhelming response I got was either "what r u looking at?... ure weird" feeling from them, or they lost interest very quickly and after excusing themselves politely, they walked away. By contrast this method worked great on less attractive girls, e.g., chubby chicks. The more I looked into their eyes and didn't say anything but smiled, the more they ate it up and chatted it up with me. Once even came over and put her bulky arms around me and asked me if I wanted a drink (some poor old guy was buying her and her friends drinks... sigh.....poor guy). So, in short, I have field tested this, and these are my observations. ANY COMMENTS REGARDING YOUR OWN FIELD REPORTS?!!!

PUA Forum https://www.pick-up-artist-forum.com/

Thoughts on 60 Years of Challenge's Anti-Manifesto https://www.pick-up-artist-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=51&t=97985	Page 1 of 2

Author:	pumpington [ Fri Aug 05, 2011 12:13 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: ANY COMMENTS REGARDING YOUR OWN FIELD REPORTS?!!! like my post elaborated on, you for some reason have this belief that somehow a girl who you find more physically attractive somehow finds you less physically attractive, and somehow a girl who you find less physically attractive finds you more physically attractive, it is all in your head, you just need to play more numbers and actually hit up some hot girls, the only thing to keep in mind is girls who recieve more attention, act like girls who recieve more attention, they have more experience socializing, and more experience giving guys shit, it is all tricks and lies, just ignore everything and continue, if they leave or get seriously insulting, then leave them be but you should just try plowing a bit more to see where the actual line is, when will a girl say LISTEN NO GTFO GO AWAY, its just more tricks and lies to break through, a girl who gets less attention, simply has less tricks and lies girls want you to have some damn balls, they will fuck with you to see how big your balls are, if you got big balls, you will be unphased and they will stop testing your balls and start sucking them

Author:	mens rea [ Fri Aug 05, 2011 12:16 pm ]
Post subject:
It's kind of sad but something I'm learning very quickly on this site is to keep thought provoking, and arguably controversial postings that promote healthy debate to myself... instead a "right on bro!!!" or "bros before hos!!" post gets you a lot more reputation points than something I would hope to encourage people to share their own stories/theories on.

Author:	pumpington [ Fri Aug 05, 2011 12:21 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: It's kind of sad but something I'm learning very quickly on this site is to keep thought provoking, and arguably controversial postings that promote healthy debate to myself... instead a "right on bro!!!" or "bros before hos!!" post gets you a lot more reputation points than something I would hope to encourage people to share their own stories/theories on. you contradict your self in your post, i am argueing vs your opinion, and now your new thesis is that, everyone agrees, when everyone in actuallity is disagreeing therefore you find this thread unhelpfull to you in field, this method has worked for me, and failed, my point was that you somehow think that a girl who you find physically attractive, is somehow going to find you less attractive then a girl who you find physically unattractive, it is simply not true, it is all in your head

Author:	mens rea [ Fri Aug 05, 2011 12:27 pm ]
Post subject:
Pimpington I agree with you on some respects. For example, just because a I find a girl more attractive doesnt mean she will find me less attractive, and vice versa. However, the context of this discussion is specifically using 60's method of less is more, and noone seems to address this portion of my post. In short, wouldn't you agree that the less attractive a guy is to a girl the more talking they have to do? And the more attractive a guy is to a girl the more successfully they can pull of the 60 method of simply building sexual tension? That's it dude. That's my point. Thoughts on that please. Thx!

Author:	mens rea [ Fri Aug 05, 2011 12:32 pm ]
Post subject:
And just to emphasize, I personally have found that 60's method gets me results when the girl is unattractive, and far less beneficial results when the girl is more attractive. This is not in my head. When a girl leans in and tries to kiss me in front of her friends I know it's working... when she walks away after calling me weird I know it hasn't. The former happened with a 4, and the latter happened twice with 6+... all using exclusively the 60 method. At least in the approach.

Author:	pumpington [ Fri Aug 05, 2011 12:43 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: Pimpington I agree with you on some respects. For example, just because a I find a girl more attractive doesnt mean she will find me less attractive, and vice versa. However, the context of this discussion is specifically using 60's method of less is more, and noone seems to address this portion of my post. In short, wouldn't you agree that the less attractive a guy is to a girl the more talking they have to do? And the more attractive a guy is to a girl the more successfully they can pull of the 60 method of simply building sexual tension? That's it dude. That's my point. Thoughts on that please. Thx! you are assuming that girls will like your personality, and will respond to it sexually, when all 60's method suggests is cut out the social aspect, and play up the sexual aspect, i don't agree, sometimes being social and demonstrating that side of you can help, and sometimes it can be counter productive, 60s method will not pull 100% of all women, but neither will any other method,even being the richest most physically attractive man, with a 8 inch cock, and 20000000 friends,with amazing wit charm and sense of humor as well as unhuman confidence, won't make you able to pull every girl in the world there will always be that one girl who says, FUCK THIS, I WANT A FAT BALD GUY, WHO IS AFRAID OF GIRLS, then she will complain, THIS GUY IS TOOOO CONFIDENT, FUCK THAT

Author:	Rawn [ Sat Aug 06, 2011 12:09 am ]
Post subject:
Quote: It's kind of sad but something I'm learning very quickly on this site is to keep thought provoking, and arguably controversial postings that promote healthy debate to myself... instead a "right on bro!!!" or "bros before hos!!" post gets you a lot more reputation points than something I would hope to encourage people to share their own stories/theories on. Sadly I have come to the same conclusion. This forum has a few Sticky topics that are great for further studying, but there is a long way between the good topics. I am happy I stumbled upon this one though, as I have read 60's work, and had some of the same thoughts as you did. Funnily I have used some of his ideas on guys to socialize myself more, and build up confidence. Among guys action says more than words, and if you can turn the guys to your side, the girls will not have as many people protecting them from you.

Author:	Drunk Romeo [ Sat Aug 06, 2011 1:12 am ]
Post subject:
Quote: Quote: Funnily I have used some of his ideas on guys to socialize myself more, Dude I think his method is about not socializing yourself more... Anyways, I have only read 60s anti manifesto but I have used his method. Never got an F close but I wouldn't say it failed(minimal foreplay is what happened). It sounds to me like you walked up to a girl and just stared her down and then hinted that you wanted to bang her. I don't think he means completely cut out talking. Obviously upon approach you should say SOMETHING! However, I do understand your point. When a girl talks to me that I find highly unattractive, I feel no sexual tension whatsoever and, if she used 60s method on me, I don't think it would work. I feel that the same would go for an attractive women if a guy she thinks is unattractive came up to her. My last point is, there are many different methods out there and not all of them are for everyone. Me personally, I like to build a lot of comfort while still keeping sexual tension. I am a big fan of juggler. 60s method obviously works ( I really dont think everyone on this forum would lie about it) but, it is not right for me. Im much more confident talking and telling stories. If you feel 60s method has flaws, then modify it or just use a different method. P.S I like to Ice skate but the first couple times I tried, I fell on my ass

Author:	lolaskate [ Sat Aug 06, 2011 3:50 am ]
Post subject:
Didn't 60 say something about 3s's? Social, Seductive, sex? or something? I'm assuming that social is still an element and it is not exclusively Seductive personality.

Page 1 of 2	All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Rawn [ Sat Aug 06, 2011 2:11 pm ]
Post subject:
Quote: Dude I think his method is about not socializing yourself more... Sometimes the direct way is not the fastest one. Sometimes you are in a situation where you will want to face the people that surround your target again. Sometimes you need to build up a little more confidence, and not having to view the guys around the taget as obstacles, but gettim them to accept you IS the fastest way to a win. It is all about context and when to apply what method - all theory is. Use what you need in the given situation.