Scam Types dot Com

I doubt that there is hardly a man in the world who doesn’t wish he had more success in attracting women. Some men, who are ‘naturals’, appear to have an endless supply of quality women chasing after them whilst the majority of men just don’t ‘get it’.

When faced with such apparent failure with the opposite sex, a great many men will give up, waiting for the time when they will ‘get lucky’. A select few, however, have taken their lack of success as a cue to go on a mission of self discovery and improvement with the aim of ultimately finding someone special, many special someones, or even for financial gain.

A number of these men then join the seduction community, becoming pick up artists (PUAs). Some, such as New York Times and Rolling Stones writer Neil Strauss (aka Style), have gone on to write books. Erik von Markovik, aka Mystery, runs workshops and offers ‘in field’ training in addition to ebooks and DVDs. Tyler Durden of Real Social Dynamics takes the commercialism even further with boot camps all around the world in addition to various series of advice available for purchase on DVD.

I may re-visit some of those mentioned above but, for now, I shall focus on David DeAngelo and whether his teachings enable men to scam women into feeling attraction for them when they otherwise would not.

Who is David DeAngelo?

Even some of his followers and fans may not know this but David DeAngelo is actually just a stage name, used by Eben W Pagan.

DeAngelo, as I shall refer to him here, began his career as a mortgage broker. Most of his success came through training real estate professionals to build sales leads through the use of direct marketing.

Having not been overly successful at attracting women, DeAngelo began looking at ways of improving this situation. He pursued many different angles, including spending time with, and questioning, men who were naturally good at attracting women. He also spent time learning from Ross Jeffries, another dating ‘guru’ who specialises in building rapport with women and influencing them via neuro linguistic programming (NLP).

DeAngelo’s findings led to him branching out on his own and releasing an ebook called Double Your Dating. Since then, DeAngelo has built up a wide range of products that relate to dating and now grosses in excess of $20 million per year in sales. The Double Your Dating newsletter boasts more than one million subscribers.

What’s it all about?

It would take far too long to give the complete details about David DeAngelo’s beliefs and teachings so this will be necessarily brief.

DeAngelo maintains that we are very akin to animals in that the vast majority of human behaviour and our socialising habits are related to sexual reproduction. Unlike animals however, humans, especially men, have become conditioned in ways that promote failure. He argues, for example, that the media typically puts forward a submissive image of men that teaches them to put women on a pedestal and to chase them, seeing them as some kind of prize.

He says that many men have become so accustomed to what they see on the television that they believe the only way to attract a female is through the use of pick up lines, taking her on expensive dates and by buying her gifts.

David DeAngelo goes into huge depth when making suggestions as to how men can become more successful with women. Succinctly, these tips encompass the fact that the majority of men have little to no understanding of what women are really looking for in a mate. Therefore, he suggests, men often wait for a woman to choose them, and settle for pretty well whomever they end up with.

He contends that men need to throw away a lot of their preconceived ideas and that they not only need to learn new techniques but that they need to make them part of who they are, rather than a set of canned responses.

David DeAngelo’s teachings

In a nutshell, here are some of DeAngelo’s main thoughts and tips on attracting women -

• Women are less visual than men and so perceived poor looks are not a viable excuse for a man
• Attraction isn’t a choice - women ‘feel it’ for a real man, based on certain evolutionary qualities they have - DeAngelo says these qualities can be learned
• Women respond to certain character traits - confidence, independence, humour and not taking oneself too seriously. He refers to this as having a cocky and funny attitude

In simple terms, DeAngelo suggests that men take the dating scene far too seriously and approach it with incorrect assumptions. He believes that men need to radically change the way they think in order to be more successful. For example, he refers back to being cocky and funny on many occasions, saying that such an attitude projects the image that the man is secure, humourous, and a challenge, something which he says women crave in a man.

He warns about the effects of societal thinking with regard to attraction - modern media projects a feminist view on dating, but he argues that what women say they want is often not what they really want. By this, he means that women are looking for a high status male, even though virtually every film and television programme shows men to be low status submissives, bending over to a woman’s will. Unfortunately, this is shown to work in these fictitious works, something which DeAngelo claims is totally the opposite to the realities of life.

Does following a PUAs teachings make you a scammer?

Like many of my other posts here, what you think about the teachings of these so called pick up artists is going to depend upon your own point of view.

In my opinion, I don’t believe that having an open mind and learning new ways of approaching women means that you are necessarily trying to find a way to scam them into bed, a date, relationship or whatever. The ability to take in information, process it, apply what we need and evaluate it’s effectiveness is what separates us from the animals.

Personally, I recognise some of the things that David DeAngelo says in myself - I certainly don’t take women, or anything for that matter, too seriously and like to have fun with them in a teasing kind of way. I’m not scared to project a sense of sexuality and would definitely walk away from any woman who expected me to pay her way in life. (I guess that’s why I’m currently getting divorced!).

These attitudes, though they seem counter intuitive, have often led to women pursuing me. Because of the conditioning of the media I have always been puzzled as to why that was, but never really thought too much about it until now. I don’t know if that is an endorsement of David DeAngelo’s teachings as it is who I am, not something I have learned from a course.

Is learning ‘techniques’ a form of manipulation?

Yes.

I guess learning ways of increasing a woman’s attraction to you could be termed manipulation in the sense that you are deliberately taking action to try and bring about a certain result, whatever it may be.

That said, think about the next time you offer to buy a woman a drink, or take her to the movies. Is that just generosity or are you saying, “like me because I’m spending money on you”?

Personally, I think spending money on a woman is a worse kind of manipulation as it is very calculated. What do you think?

Conclusion

I’ve read a lot about David DeAngelo and what he teaches. I cannot vouch for the usefulness of his products or advice, though I see some of his suggestions in my own personality. I believe that improving yourself and being open to new ideas is part of being human and an attractive proposition in itself. In no way is it a means of scamming women into artificially liking you.

Sure, it may be a form of manipulation but then men have been manipulating women since the dawn of time. Surely it is better to become a better person, through such self development, encompassing such changes into your personality, than to ‘buy’ women’s time and affection with overt acts and gifts?

My lasting impression of the teachings of David DeAngelo are that they could aid men in attracting women in a way which I actually find to be more moral than the traditional and socially accepted norms.

What are your views on this?

1,378 views