Former Community – We Moved
🆕 Coached community here, for posts & feedback public community here.
Learning "game" and dating power dynamics: is it antisocial?
Sandra Brown, author of “Women Who Love Psychopaths” says that any man looking into seduction advice is by its very nature high in psychopathy traits.
I don’t fully disagree, actually, and there are some people -and even coaches- who are high in dark triad traits (see Mystery from “Mystery Method”, a full-blown narcissist).
But I also disagree in large part.
Many people learn, and some are reading here, because they are driven men and women, looking to do more, be more, and maximize their potential.
And that’s not psychopathic.
And among driven men who take time to study, psychopaths are often the minority.
While most psychopaths don’t have enough patience to stick with complex information to learn and grow, most high-quality men and women do have that patience.
And the more empathic high-quality men and women learn power dynamics, the better off we will be as a society.
says that any man looking into seduction advice is by its very nature high in psychopathy traits.
Pure labelling. Zero foundation argument. She has not been on this journey so she does not know that the majority of men who look into dating advice are anxiously-attached, codependent or introverted nice guys. So the complete opposite. Poor judgment. Guys high on psychopathic traits just use their ego to seduce girls, they don't study. They use their dominance and project the traits women are looking for. Actually, psychopathy as a mental disease is quite rare. Who she's talking about (again) are the narcissists I believe. Much more common. I think the term "manipulative" or "manipulator" is more accurate than "psychopaths". I haven't read the book though. Also, deception is part of the human mating process. So it's a fair game if you think about it.
And the more empathic high-quality men and women learn power dynamics, the better off we will be as a society.
Yes, as well as conveniently forgetting that plenty of women are doing pretty much the same (probably more than men).
I often use it as a tease when some woman tells me they were out with their girlfriends, and I joke "talking about men, I bet".
Well, guess how many times that turns out to be exactly the case? :).
That's all strategizing about "game".
Sure some of those women are more manipulative than the average, but there are also plenty of high-quality ones doing the same -as they should, after all: high-quality people care about finding and keeping other high-quality people, and that requires good strategies-.
100%
It's really interesting to note that the label of "psychopath" usually applies to people who want to learn the skill of influencing others. Any other skill that you choose to get good at: computer programming, automobile repair, writer; won't earn you the label of "psychopath". You could argue that it only applies to people that want to use their influence for unethical reasons, but would someone who chooses to use their computer programming skills to hack into other people's computers be labelled as a psychopath?
Great observation, JP, and it's true indeed.
It's also a label that is bandied around a bit too freely.
Someone does something amoral? Psychopath!
In this specific case, the lady who wrote the book got hurt in a relationship with a psychopath, and it seems like her emotional scar led to some extremization.
Which is quite common, especially when the pain was very deep.
Some men do the same, too. They get hurt with a woman because they were too trustworthy of the wrong person, and then all women become untrustworthy bitches.
