Your dark triad personality and your seducer style

[Space]

I've had a little fun with the Dark Triad test. The test claims do not take it seriously but I suspect the idea behind it is to push you into one of the main dark triad categories. Either your main trait is Narcissist, Machiavellian, or Psychopath. My main trait is Machiavellian which shouldn't be surprising to a trained psychologist had he gone through my posts here. The test compares you how do you scale compare to the general population. I scale average so I don't worry about it. Remember, the main idea of the test is to push you into one of the three categories. All right.

@Bacchus suggested me his article previously.

Anyway, here's the primer on the 3 schools. . . https://www.girlschase.com/content/3-schools-seduction-and-differences-between-each

It starts by saying that in seduction you come across a high amount of contradictory information. And this article was a case in point for me. I only managed through the first half of it but already disagreed so much of it that I couldn't take it anymore. I'm sorry Bacchus. The article states there are 3 types of seducers, the Screener being the beginner type who does well in crowded events and loud night clubs but not so well in every day environments and quiet places. I quote, Crippling limitations regarding environment and sexual partners (what?) and Lowered odds of success with hotter women (doesn't apply but I don't call women hot). You know what? I may agree with the notion of You end up developing an incomplete skill set may be true.

I haven’t coached in pick up since 2016. I actually think it’s mostly toxic. It’s not because of SJWs. It’s because I really think PUA and the mindset Chase is promoting on his site is actually toxic.

Start with this video if you want my thoughts on this: https://www.davidtianphd.com/mindset/game-fcking-us/

This could have went to the David Tian topic (where I planned a longer post about other things, never mind) as his podcast is called Man Up! Man up! is one of the most toxic thing you can say to yourself as a man. I don't mean it in the sense feminists think about "toxic masculinity" but in the sense that men can be toxic for themselves. This thinking causes men to live shorter lives, commit suicide at a higher rate, suffer more from substance abuse than women, etc.

I've watched the David Tian video. I'm very pragmatic about it and I've found interesting the part when he did nothing but read the definition of the narcissist personality disorder from the DSM (The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders). So yeah, if my seducer style as a screener leaves me with an incomplete skills set insofar I couldn't care less tricking women who don't like me in the first place to like me, so be it.

Oh, and you had a long discussion about David Tian in the other topic based on two sentences he said without even watching his presentation. That's so deep.

I'm more for the abundance mindset. Why chase girls, why chase every girl when more, better ones come to your way who chase you? I'm still confused about the site Girls Chase is supposed to be about girls chasing you not you chase the girls. But for quite a few members it's the exact opposite as it seems. This is what the linked topic GC team: As individuals do you give contradictory advice to other team members? is about. Anyway. Seduction is just a part time hobby for me.

I don't want to copy-paste myself but what I had to say is basically we have finite life energies on this Earth and yes, pumping and dumping is a sub-optimal use of our resources without the "compounding interest" effect.

And yes, I don't have the time nor the intellectual curiosity to develop dark Narcissist superpowers (next to my Machiavellian ones) to trick women who are inherently not into me to like me. I'm sorry if it's a disappointment to you.

I have to argue with Bacchus stating in the article that the Screener mindset is the beginner mindset you ideally outgrow. First, my personal experience suggests me I become more of a screener during my past year of the journey. Senior guys who I can mostly relate to are primarily screeners, too. Brent Smith, Nick Sparks, Mark Manson, and Chris "60 Years of Challenge". Limitations regarding the environment we can successfully operate in and the "hotness" (I don't call women hot) of the women we can attract definitely do not apply to us. Bacchus' identifying certain guys as screeners seem to not much the experience of guys who self-identify as screeners. Even our senior member friend Oh_Pry self-identifies as a screener, but he does only online so he is different.

That's the thing man, you get to a level in the game where the bullshit is enough and you want the path of least resistance. You get to the point where you have a type, you wanna fuck that type a lot, and do so with the path of least resistance.

TLDR. Identifying your seducer style based on your dominant dark triad personality trait would sound like a much more interesting experiment to me. What do you think?

Instead of. What? What Bacchus' categorization is based on?

@onespiritualpitcher, at least I partially answered your question, regarding Bacchus' article and my stance on seducer styles. My "problem" here is that I inspire others to write long posts to me (that's good) but each and every one of them would require similarly long answers on my part and I single-handedly can't keep up with writing that much. Hence my forum bankruptcy.

 

[naturalmikey]

That’s a great article on three types of seducers. My name is a joke and the natural style is definitely the one I use the least. Styles one and three are definitely my go tos. Trying to move back more into the third style and out of the first.

 

[Space]

You seem to attach far too much of your ego. . . to my article's assessment Space.

@Bacchus, that's interesting that you call out my ego. Based on your only information about me being what I share about myself on this forum in writing. Is it my ego or my logic if it has to be one of the two?

Todd is often referred here as a super logical guy (I'd also consider myself this super logical guy similar in this way to Todd although our seduction styles may be different)

If you ask me about myself, I would say it's my logic. My friends, work colleagues, and just casual acquaintances would call it to my logic as well, not my ego I guess. But maybe you already know me better and it's truly my big ego and not my logic, and who am I to judge myself anyway?

Right now if you want to get into GC stuff you go to the beginning of the blog and start reading all the articles one by one. That's nice but I don't plan to become a full time pickup coach neither most guys and for us the best 20% of your articles are probably plenty for life (Pareto-principle). Which 20% of your articles are the best to build a solid foundation for the average person? That's the million dollar question Chase is trying to sort out right now I guess, or something like that.

So according to my logic if I were to read a new ebook compiled just from the articles currently available on the site but for the average reader (who don't want to train to become a pickup coach so he don't need to read all articles on the site from the beginning) by either the Girls Chase team as a collective or only by you Bacchus, as an individual I'm pretty sure the article about the The 3 Schools of Seduction wouldn't be the very first chapter of it. Sometimes it makes sense to read a random article of the Girls Chase site "without all the prior knowledge" but in this particular case I would take the step-by-step approach and proceed from the first chapter is leading to The 3 Schools of Seduction chapter some time later in the book. Or hypothetical book. I don't know if it makes sense to you if we assume it's because of my logic and not my ego?

and his first lesson in his free Crash Course is about defining your seduction goals. Defining your goals outside of categories first, then we can talk about what you personally want to achieve what your personality is maybe 50% seducer style A and 50% seducer style B, or 25% seducer style B and 75% seducer style C or 33% seducer style A, 33% seducer style B and 33% seducer style C and we can develop a personalized plan for you based on your goals and your personality. This is where I am with this.

I would start with the reader's personal seduction goals first before introducing him to concepts like the different schools of seduction. Otherwise, I noticed you have some cool content regarding female sexuality and Nancy Friday's work, so you see, I'm not at all against learning something new from you.

Debunking Screening game - This piece by @Skills at NextASF made total sense to me - even without any prior knowledge.

 

[Skills]

@Space that article was written in 2015, I retracted a lot of that article in this other post in sedfast:

teevester 8 orgasms routine -Sex talk for dummies- - NextASF

I can guarantee you that if you fully implement and do exactly as i said and field test you will have a high probability of this working, but again you need to do

nextasf.com

The different schools of seduction part 2.... - NextASF

Please check part 1 which i wrote in 2013, before this one (http://www.theskillsmethod.com/different-schools-seduction/).... Disclaimer.- This is my opinion based

nextasf.com

i also spoke about the 3 schools of seduction previous to bacchus: http://www.theskillsmethod.com/different-schools-seduction/


The gll screening and 60 yoc direct game, does not give high odds (i almost always go indirect by the way 98% of the time, i only go direct if in extreme rush)

 

[Cody Lyans]

My dark triad is... Too stupid to complete the test. I think that means that I am a natural seducer xP

I think that to connect your flaws to your reason u chose your type of game makes sense, but at the same time, it's not a super productive thought unless teaching yourself to read people better