That word has gained a com.ple.tely new meaning for me in the last couple of weeks.
I have to admit, I never would have guessed that my internship could change my view on life-related matters. But it did.
When I started working for the series Hunter n Hornet, I was just so happy to be on set everyday and ecstatic at the idea of playing a minor role in it. When production ended, I was so happy to be editing videos again and learning about PR. What I could never have fathomed though was the learnings I would earn from the actual theme of the series: Picking up girls.
So the series is about two wanna be Pick Up Artists (just that alone, I had no idea it was a Thing) who can’t summon up the courage to talk to girls so they role-play their techniques on each other, leaving them forever Average Frustrated Chumps.
Working along-side the people who created the series and the actors who researched their roles, I started to catch glimpses of this world that I had never heard of before, but when it really hit me was when I attended a PUA seminar (yes seriously they named themselves). So basically what happens is, there’s a good-looking guy standing in front of an audience (95% men, let’s not deceive ourselves) that’s telling them (you) what they (you) need to do to talk naturally to a girl in bar. I am not kidding. Those classes are available for women as well.
Ok so fine I get that some people need confidence boosting and a few pointers, and what the good-looking, talkative guy was saying actually made a lot of sense. But does there need to be so much complications around it? Theories and methods and words like “peacocking” (when men wear certain clothes or an accessory that attracts attention and thus is an easy subject of conversation. Wait no sorry they call that an “opener” not a topic) and sets (no we are not two women talking to each other, we are a “two-set”). And looking up online all the books, the forums where men would argue intensely on which is the “best” method to get laid.
Are you KIDDING me????
I have honestly never come across, even from very far, to anything like that in France or Singapore.
Here I’ve learned of the 3 second rule: they say that when a guy sees a girl he likes (sorry “a target”), he has 3 seconds to go talk to her before his brain tries to find all the reasons why he shouldn’t go. It’s sounds as if they are jumping off a cliff. Funnily enough a French guy just told me recently that in France there is the 7 looks rule: a guy needs to share 7 looks with the girl before he can go talk to her. I suppose that gives him time to make sure he actually likes her physically, and if she has stared at him 7 times, surely enough she likes him back. Somehow that makes more sense to me, but that is still a theory.
I’ve always hated theories. Long intense and boring speeches to say something that can be said in just one sentence, or better yet that can be a simple, natural act. I am more of an instinctive creature, street-smart they say, don’t know why I do things, I just feel an impulsion: this is what I need to do now. And that is it.
So I do feel sorry for those men who need such theories and dissections of the most natural thing in the world. I feel even more sorry for those who use that “knowledge” to get with a different girl every night. How sad.
Oddly enough, I can now tell that my past Australian-bound-frogs have definitely been taking some pointers from those PUAs. Maybe not all consciously, but I’m thinking it might be a common knowledge amongst the ozzie-men. I might be wrong, but there are some shocking resemblances in the way boys have flirted with me here and those game guidelines. Urgh. Gross.
So I researched the women’s point of view. And found a book called: The G.F. List: One Woman, With a List of Men, Answering The Question Singles Hate by Sharyn Atkinson. It’s not quiiiite the same thing, but more about a woman unravelling her dating experiences and the different types of men she encounters (I guess that makes sense as to why it’s so appealing to me…). Anyway I scroll down on the pages available on Amazon and something jumps at me. She goes something like: “There used to be SNAGGs in the early nineties (sensitive new age guys) now there are CARLs : creepy, annoying, rude losers.”
I could not agree more…
But now with all that ghastly information in hand, I suppose it will be much easier to spot those CARLs and run away in the opposite direction.
(I’m also probably going to buy her book very soon. Just for the purposes of research. You know.)
Xoxo – from Bondi with Love