Please or Register to create posts and topics.

John Anthony Lifestyle VS Playing With Fire: Case Study

Page 1 of 2Next

John Anthony Lifestyle VS Playing With Fire

John Anthony Lifestyle and Alex from "Playing With Fire" had an interesting beef.

John Anthony is a peculiar dating coach who rose to popularity, in part, by roasting and blasting other dating coaches.
Alex is a dating coach who initially focused on online dating -initially, at least-.

They were friends, worked together, and promoted each other's products.

Now they make videos dissing each other.

Let's skip the drama and focus on the topic of this thread: red flags.

The red flags that tell you who to be close with, and who to avoid.

John / Alex call: power dynamics breakdown

The first few seconds are truly all we need.

First off, note that John joins the call late.

And instead of apologizing:

Alex: alright, we got John on
John: What up. You interrupted some Jacuzzi sex

LOL, one cannot start with a bigger power move.

It's not like Alex went there and dragged him out.
Alex didn't interrupt anything.

And, if it even mattered, note that John was texting Alex before joining.
So he either texts while having sex, or... You draw your own conclusions.

Then:

Alex: damn man (laughs) (<--- confirms John's frame and story)  You might have to go an extra 2h without busting a nut ( <--- builds John up. Alex answers to red-level one-up with a green build-up. He gives to the taker)
John: (ignores the question) the first thing I come on to is Alex saying "I use a condom", which is a disgrace, I should leave right now ( <--- I'm laughing typing this. This is so obvious and in your face that you should close the call immediately)
Alex: (solid voice and delivery, but still power down and stays within John's frame)
John: how many people are on (<---- changes topic once again to remain in the lead, and tasks Alex)
Alex: we got 47 (<----  executes the task)

If you've gone through PU, you already have all you need to know.

10 seconds in, from one single interview, you can already tell how much John respects Alex.
And how much John values win-win (at least with Alex).

And you also know what Alex should do next.

Instead, Alex keeps working closely with John.
And from the little I've seen, Alex seemed to be glad, even proud, of being in daily contact with John (judging from a couple YouTube comments where he says he knows more about John because the commentator "isn't the one who's in daily WhatsApp contact with John).

I remember seeing that interview back then and thinking "this is not going to end well"...

1 year later: guess what happened

The two aren't friends anymore.

It seems like John Anthony started it when he wanted to block one of Alex' collaborations.

However it went, now John Anthony goes out of his way to damage Alex.
John says that Alex has:

  1. bad game
  2. unattractive women
  3. hires terrible coaches
  4. "stole his shit"

You can argue how effective and convincing he is, but you're usually always better off without a public reputation war.
Plus, John has a bigger followers base.
So it's certainly not good for Alex.

Who could have seen that coming, eh?

John Freeman, Jack and 2 other users have reacted to this post.
John FreemanJackBelleaderoffun
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

I have not closely followed their clash but John Anthony seems to be someone that has the tendency to burn bridges.

Lucio Buffalmano and Growfast have reacted to this post.
Lucio BuffalmanoGrowfast
Quote from lilsim on October 23, 2022, 3:34 pm

I have not closely followed their clash but John Anthony seems to be someone that has the tendency to burn bridges.

Yeah, no surprise, it's in plain sight: seeking (disempowering) high dominance with little warmth

Jack and Growfast have reacted to this post.
JackGrowfast
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

Reading this post again, I think the mistake was made from the start.

When you decide to associate with someone who his business  is roasting others it’s a big risk.

The chances that he is going to come for you at some point is very high.

These people are always in fight mode. And you are either with them or against them. There is no in between for them.

also, the fact that he’s making so many enemies you are gonna look bad by association. You are going to miss some opportunities for networking just by being friend with him.

Lucio Buffalmano, Growfast and Bel have reacted to this post.
Lucio BuffalmanoGrowfastBel

Yep, true, just not a good business partnership.

There may be some exceptions to the "highly critical attitude", for example, Coffeezilla since he at least has a very positive reputation.

But even then, if you need to make alliances, it's risky because are often (secretly) afraid of the overly critical -and in some cases, for good reasons: you never know if they turn into witch hunters or get it wrong and attack you for the wrong reasons, even if originally well-meaning).

Quote from Jack on May 27, 2023, 11:22 am

These people are always in fight mode. And you are either with them or against them. There is no in between for them.

Great personality analysis.

Trump may also be a similar case.

Jack, Growfast and Bel have reacted to this post.
JackGrowfastBel
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

And the contempt for the world in his resting upper lip.

It has been there so long that it has shaped his lip shape.

As Lincoln said, after a certain age any man is responsible for his face.

I can’t still really believe how some people can seemingly achieve “success”. Maybe their definition of success is very different from mine.

Lucio Buffalmano, Jack and Growfast have reacted to this post.
Lucio BuffalmanoJackGrowfast
Quote from Bel on May 27, 2023, 1:55 pm

And the contempt for the world in his resting upper lip.

It has been there so long that it has shaped his lip shape.

As Lincoln said, after a certain age any man is responsible for his face.

100%, and great quote.

To not see this one... Damn, one must have really drank the naive cool aid of "not judging a book by its cover" to the point of getting drunk with stupidity.

As for many things, the idea of "not judging a book by its cover" is good... Up to a certain point.
The current (Western) culture went too far with that and many who believed in it have mistakenly lowered their guard and stopped heeding the natural self-defense instincts that many people have inborn (and should have).

Growfast and Bel have reacted to this post.
GrowfastBel
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

Apparently his 1,300 conquests were unable to see it.

Which begs the question if they, unfortunately, were really traumatized people, or if they even do exist.

Quote from Bel on May 27, 2023, 3:43 pm

Apparently his 1,300 conquests were unable to see it.

Which begs the question if they, unfortunately, were really traumatized people, or if they even do exist.

Don't wanna go off-topic, so if interested open a new one after this.

But quickly:

OFF-TOPIC

Not necessarily.

  1. For many women, a high dark triad man or even a total asshole can still be better than a too-nice guy
    Edit: which is one of the reasons why TPM's work is good for society. Fewer women ending up with assholes when "good guys" step up their game 🙂
  2. A one-night stand with a condom can be a lot less bonehead than a longer-term friend friendship or business partnership with the wrong person
  3. A lower SMV woman can still gain with a higher SMV man. High numbers also say little about skills because "fishing down" requires different (and less) skills than going parallel (or above, the most challenging)
  4. Stringing alcohol or drug-fueled one-night stands also means you end up with certain types of women that "better vibe" with you (not too high-quality, potentially themselves antisocials, in environments where bad choices are more likely, etc. etc.)
  5. What some people say has no link to reality (as you already hinted to).
    As a matter of fact, if certain individuals say X, you can most safely guess that X is not true. And if certain individuasl say a number and that number is supposedly framed as "good", you can most safely guess the real number is not what they say but (much) lower

OFF-TOPIC

John Freeman, Jack and 2 other users have reacted to this post.
John FreemanJackGrowfastBel
Have you read the forum guidelines for effective communication already?

Thank you! Brutal…

I think it also shows how leadership and status are situational. Alex prouds himself of being dominant but still submits to John.

Page 1 of 2Next
Processing...
Scroll to Top