If you have seen the show The Dog Whisperer then you may have picked up on some key ideas much like I have. Looking at the show you will instantly notice concepts that are preached by PUA, but intertwined into correcting the behaviors of dogs. There are so many similarities between the social groups of women and the packs that dogs have, really if you read into it, it seems kinda silly. Infact if you look at how Cesar talks about body language and voice tonality its insane!

What am I trying to say by this? By no means am I saying that you should kick your girl when she is bad, and by no means am I calling your mom a dog. What I am saying however, is that the way that relationships with women should be built and the way you should interact with women is with the same intent in mind.

By watching the show you can see that Cesar Millan preaches of how to become the "Pack Leader", and by really looking at this term and what it means to dogs it seems to me to have major similarities with being a AMOG. Making sure not to let the dogs be in charge, but instead taking charge for yourself.

It is said by many that you dont have to work for the affection of dogs. This is true to an extent. Dogs will look for attention from someone no matter how you treat them, but anyone who has seen the show knows that giving them unearned attention can only lead to their misbehavior and poor SPAM of you. ( This is Key here because it is almost identical with the way women should be treated. DONT HAND THEM LOVE THEY HAVE NOT EARNED.) For any healthy relationship to work in any situation BOTH partners must work for eachothers affection.

How does this tie into "sarging, pick-up, seduction techniques, and strategies"? Its quite simple really all PUA's both newbies and PUA should keep this concept in mind. Especially for newbies, if you remember this everytime you open a set it will help you look past the looks of a woman; a major problem many newbies have. This simple idea will take you a long way.

Well thats all I have to say for now, please rate and comment. I want some feedback on my theory here so let me know. Thanks Guys!

Note: It is not my intention to offend anyone with this post. Please pay close attention to the statement "For any healthy relationship to work in any situation BOTH partners must work for eachothers affection" above for it is the real key to my message I am trying to post.

I totally want to bring attention to this thread!! Zip. Hobbit. Bonita

Dangerous territory my friend....dangerous comparison. I suggest that you do a little more research and in-field learning before you write posts like this.

But, I will be sure to follow along in the giant shitstorm you just made.

_________________
[color=red:7c51ae7520]email is a better option: thelockestar@gmail.com[/color:7c51ae7520][/size:7c51ae7520]

As I have stated above I am not aiming to offend here at all. I am simply saying that love is a mutual relationship between both partners much like how a owner should treat his or her dog. With the love that they earn from being loyal. Again this goes both ways. Men should make women earn their affection, and women should make men work for it. This is a very deep analysis I thought I would share so try to be open minded with it.

I didn't say you were being offensive, but: women~dogs is a tough sell

_________________
[color=red:7c51ae7520]email is a better option: thelockestar@gmail.com[/color:7c51ae7520][/size:7c51ae7520]

Haha yeah it is. Its only a matter of time till I'm hunted down for the post

TRICKY. I will fully review this in the morning when I am not spitting blood and hatorade.

The woman whisperer... tough sell... and been done before. Old, tired, and wrong wrong wrong.

Mindset is everything. This is a disgusting mindset that only leads to the dark place.

We'll see what I have to say in the morning.

_________________
- Zip

I guess you could put it this way. I think it is important to be the dominate person in a relationship. I don't care what women tell you, but women love to be dominated by a alpha male that can hadle them. Not in a freaky fetish way of course. Somes i do give a girl a "treat" for being a good girl. lol. And some women do love doggy style...so maybe this makes sence.

BTW i dont think women are like dogs. At lease most women...

_________________
The New Breed
Evolve

right, but you obviously believe that all women like the male to have the "dominant" role in the relationship. Ill tell you right now....it is going to vary. And until you realize that through experience, you shouldnt be posting theories like this.

_________________
[color=red:7c51ae7520]email is a better option: thelockestar@gmail.com[/color:7c51ae7520][/size:7c51ae7520]

See here http://www.podcastdirectory.com/podcasts/30921

The chick whisperer. Scot McKay. Been around forever.

_________________
- Zip

Zip, that isn't "flamy" enough. Blood must be drawn!

Winter's Chill....tell us how you think they can be trained to fetch beerZZ.

_________________
[color=red:7c51ae7520]email is a better option: thelockestar@gmail.com[/color:7c51ae7520][/size:7c51ae7520]

Hell, it worked on Eric Cartman.



As a psychology major, I can attest to the fact that you can study some human behavior by studying animal behavior.

Things like classical conditioning, originally discovered by Pavlov when studying his dogs, have been effectively translated into socialization techniques such as anchoring.

I fully endorse posting theories like this. This guy saw something that he thought was highly relevant, and it is. David Deangelo even covers some material from a dog training book in the first edition of his Advanced Series program.

The problem here isn't an objectification of women. When you guys think things like "he's comparing women to dogs," that's obviously attached to a negative connotation. Let me ask you this, though:

...what's so bad about dogs?

Dogs are living beings that love and are loved by families all across the United States. Women are living beings that love and are loved by men all across the United States. How about showing some compassion for all living beings, huh?

Reframed. Booya.

nah this is totally legit it really is.


its a touchy subject but i am in a feminism class at college and girls who play into their gender roles are asking for the shit that comes to them

girls when with guys in a casual social setting are rarely the alpha of the group or if they are they many times come off as a bitch (where many guys dont have to)

so basically u kno the social game, u kno the pickup game, u kno what u want (sex)

and lets be honest, girls arent as physically minded (there are many horny girls tho)...

so basically u dictate what they think and who they want to fuck

and u encourage good behavior cuz ur looking out for their best interest (fucking u instead of some douchbag amog)

keep those girls in line

i say that in a not so sexist way im just poking fun at girls who play into patriarchial social roles for gender

I think the problem with this thread is NOT that most people don't like to consider themselves animals.

I think the problem with this thread is that women are debased as dogs and men are elevated to their masters. I find nothing wrong with metaphorical or even base-brain conversations where we talk about the animal instinct within us all.

I do have problems with men considering themselves as masters to "dogs" rather than masters of social dynamics.

Why is this so important? Why are my panties in a bunch? Am I a super feminist? No. Am I a humanist? YES. Do I care about semantics and mindset? YES.

By applying this theory, you not only debase your target, but you debase yourself. I'd rather be a master of gods than a master of dogs.

Semantics is like body language. It affects mindset. This is on the track to the dark place of pick-up.

My humble opinion.

P.S. I have no problem with posting theories like this. It leads, obviously, to captivating discussions.

_________________
- Zip

yes Chief, Psych. But notice you say "human to animal" then shortly below you note "women to dog"

I am onboard with Zip. If we are going to make references to behavioral studies, then it needs to be sexless.

Pavlov also states that if you beat something enough it will eventually obey. Just throwing that out there, in case anyone wanted to learn some more Psych info that they can apply to the women that they own.

_________________
[color=red:7c51ae7520]email is a better option: thelockestar@gmail.com[/color:7c51ae7520][/size:7c51ae7520]

Zip. I respect your "humble opinion", but I am quite upset that my post is being misunderstood. The responses I have recieved are excellent. The fact that there is an indepth discussion happening here shows that the theory proves to be intresting to people. this pleases me very much. That is not why I am upset though. I completely see all sides to the argument and written oppisitions happening, but feel that I have done a poor job in stating what I meant. I will not try to rephrase it at this moment, due to me being insanely tired, but will ask that you read the post one more time and try to make sense of the thing. And my thanks to Locke for trying to start a blood bath between Zip and I hehe.

Now, also, on the note of this kinda thing poping up in other places of the web. I didnt look at the site Zip posted for very long, but it appears to be just a sort of advice video on pick-up that shares a similar title with my thread. I very well could be wrong, but thats what I gathered.

P.S. Thanks for all the replies guys, and please keep them coming.