Attraction - Written by Entropy on Thursday, April 30, 2009 13:32 - 9 Comments

Re: Love Letter from a Billionaire

OK, this is in response to the comments and a couple emails I’ve gotten regarding the earlier post today: Love Letter from a Billionaire. Everyone’s responded with more or less the similar point: “She’s only with him for his money, this letter is chodey to the max.” Damnit, I feel like I’ve failed as a teacher. Let me try to explain some points better:

1) The laws of passive/active attraction. This has been discussed ad nauseum on this blog in the last two months: here, here, and here. The cliff’s notes? Basically if a woman perceives you to ALREADY have more value than her, than you have to DLV yourself, compliment her and act “chodey” to get her. I just explained this in my calibration post and even provided examples! For anyone who thinks this guy is a “chode,” please go back and read all of those articles.

With that said, this guy is a BILLIONAIRE, well-connected, good-looking for his age (59), educated and probably smart as hell. His passive attraction is through the goddamn roof. Also, this woman most likely met him through a social circle and was probably already attracted to him. For this guy to do ANYTHING but write a sweet, emotional letter professing his feelings for her would be a mis-step.

2) For those of you who have listened to my audio course (downloadable from the front page), I make the point that attraction = value. Basically, we’re all attracted to what we find value in — this is true for men and women. For instance, if we value petty sex, we’ll be attracted to care-free party girls who are really hot. If we value emotional connection and a relationship, we’ll be more attracted to girls with character and personality. Aside from his billion dollars and his baseball team, this guy is demonstrating that he’s romantic, passionate and courageous (as she even points out). How many 30-year-old single women out there are looking for a rich man who’s romantic, passionate and successful? Uhh… practically all of them.

3) I tried to emphasize the point that at no point did he “give up his power” as Tyler Durden would say. This is a HUGE point for guys to understand about emotional connection, because most guys who get good at this automatically assume that anything that makes you emotionally vulnerable = chodey and needy. Not true. Pussies use their emotional vulnerability to because they’re putting the woman on a pedestal. This guy isn’t. He even says, “you don’t need to respond, I just wanted to let you know.” From an inner game perspective, he’s not being needy in the slightest, what he’s conveying is complete genuine interest — which, as we know, is one of the biggest turn-ons in a woman.

4) We need to remove the words “Chode” and “AFC” from our vocabulary. If there’s one point I’ve been constantly hammering home the last few months, it’s that “chodey” and “AFC” behavior works better than any PUA material if it’s used in the right situation and for the right reasons. There’s a reason 95% of the population uses it. I was recorded in-field by DJFuji last fall. I made out with a girl and pulled her and he commented the next day, “Dude, I don’t even know what you did. You barely said anything after you opened her. You like complimented her, bought her a drink and then took her home and fucked her.” It’s because if you have the right frame and aren’t needy, a lot of this “chodey” shit works like a charm. You just have to know when to use it.

Hopefully this makes more sense. I threw this up because this is an example contrary to typical PUA pick ups in a lot of ways. It’s good because it gets us thinking “outside the box.” And not only that, but if we’re going to have any theories about attraction and pick up, they need to be consistent in all situations, not just club skanks and college girls.

  • Share/Bookmark

Like This Article? Join My Newsletter!
:


9 Comments

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Arock
Apr 30, 2009 16:31

I understand what you’re saying, but take away the money and make them both twenty-five (probably the average age of your readers) and this will never work. I guess what I’m saying is: As a non-middle-aged, non-billionaire, how is this relevant to me (and about 99.9% of your readers).

pickle
Apr 30, 2009 18:54

i realize there is no intonation on the interweb but that was met to be sarcastic I don’t want you getting ocnfused.

chaosman
May 1, 2009 3:31

Very nice follow up entropy. I think you hit it on the dot. I think people play way too much into the “PUA” style try hard game when sometimes you need very little to impress a woman when calibrated correctly. Dont worry about the haters they are just bitter they still arent getting laid.

Hammer
May 1, 2009 5:24

I agree that he had to DLV himself, which I believe is a point that I made in my response. That said, I think he went overboard. I think that her response illustrates this fact well.

As a side note, I disagree with your point that attraction = value. I think that value based attraction is one kind of attraction, but there are others as well. Sinn talks about there being 3 types of attraction: value based, sexual, and interesting/fun. I don’t know if these are necessarily them to a T but I would definitely say that different combinations of the types of attraction attract different girls, which is why some girls just love it when you’re super sexual while others prefer a really funny and entertaining guy.

Entropy
May 1, 2009 9:48

@Hammer: And I would argue that being sexual and being fun/interesting are just other forms of value. Value isn’t just social value (as RSD teaches), it can be sexual value, emotional value, etc.

And yes, different girls prefer different types of value.

Dave
May 1, 2009 13:55

If you haven’t seen it, check out the full article about their romance. It answers some of the questions you wrote about them.
http://www.bostonmagazine.com/articles/the_owner_takes_a_wife/

- I agree that the email is great on many levels. It shows him to be vulnerable and sensitive. The subtext that he is emotional and introspective is a perfect contrast to the billionaire-trader-sports-owner image that he knows she must have. And he must have known from their brief meetings that she is an intellectual, so his writing emphasizes that he is erudite, a man of letters, and not just a numbers-only businessman.

- But my impression from the full article is that he’s extremely, extremely needy regarding her. You skipped the elephant in the room: age. When they met, he was 59, she was 29. The day she was born, he was already older than she is even now. It’s polite to say that age doesn’t matter, but every girl in her 20s will tell you that it’d be weird to date a guy who’s almost 60. Gross, they’d say. He’s clearly fighting against that, and it puts a veneer of desperation on everything he writes and does.

- All his status and money can’t buy him the wonder of youth. He knows he needs a young girl to feel it. And it seems that at the beginning of the relationship, they’re both clear that on a relative basis, SHE is the prize (to quote Thundercat) and that he is the needy one.

- You’re right that being vulnerable isn’t chody or giving up power. And his email is definitely ballsy. But everything about it screams neediness. It’s way too overboard after having only met very briefly once and chatted another time at a group dinner. And to me, writing his last line that “no response is necessary” is the neediest way to beg for a response. I read it as “Translation: I’m taking a huge risk with this email, it freaks me out, and I know you think I’m old, so please, please, please write back and make me feel like I didn’t just walk the plank by myself.”

- As he continued to purusue her, I’d say the money began to really, really matter and to compensate for his old age. Unless you argue that the capitalist system rewards exactly those men that are most attractive to women, then his level of wealth has gotta be the big factor. If he had ended up with only $200k in the bank instead of billions, would she have given him the time of day… even if he was otherwise the same thoughtful, passionate, intelligent, literate 59-year-old grey-haired man? The article tries to paint his nice gestures for her as the little things a lovestruck teenager does for his girl, but they’re all about his money: cooking dates with a chef aboard his 164-foot, 12-crewman yacht; popping her out to one of his California homes on his private jet so she could have an outdoor tent sleepover; taking her to games of the baseball team he owns (and hanging out there with his friends like Warren Buffet and Stephen King); helicopter tours of Manhattan; parties with the racecar team he owns; etc… From the article, it’s clear that she already was a socialite-in-the-making. Her family is new rich, she’s a regular on the high society charity circuit, etc. Of course his wealth and status matter to this type of girl (and probably to her family as well, despite their initial supposed reservations about him).

- My conclusion of all this. He sounds painfully shy and nervous, embarassed by the age difference, and conscious of how much he needs and wants a young girl in order to feel the joy of youth again. And in his pursuit of her, he wrote an email which was actually quite good if you’re going after an intellectual girl for a relationship, altho it’s too needy after just a short initial meeting. So I give props to him. But I think his money and status matter more than his method of pursuit. The list of similarly old billionaires marrying hot young girls is huge: Jim Clark (64 marrying 29), Larry Ellison (59 marrying 33), George David (58 married 29), Rupert Murdoch (68 marrying 31), and many many more. Bottom line: all these swimsuit models, Swedish royalty, Chinese beauty queens and beautiful Italian-American intellectuals in their 20s don’t marry 60-year old men because of emotionally connective emails, no matter how well-written they are.

Six
May 3, 2009 13:40

Cudos Mark, your insight about communication and maturity is beyond your physical age.
I feel her over all response to Mr. Henry , a little cool. Over looked, to date, is HER desire for “acknowledgement” for HER “courage and honesty”. I am guessing these are what she displayed . . . “Because a brief encounter-and-a-half with you. . . ”
I think she is subtly sub-communicating to him that to move forward with her, these are the qualities he needs to acknowledge and be smitten with. I think she wanted him to understand the courage it takes to be involved with a man of so high value AND so high of a social standing.
I think she is saying that it’s going to take a lot of honesty to keep attraction working to overcome that ever present disparity of value.
She understands that the she already posses the qualities for any man, or woman, as his “muse”, or her . . . “great service . . . [to him for making the] world brighter, better, lighter and warmer. ” Nothing unique about those. Its seems that her thanks to him of those were an after thought. I Notice there is a period after me, “. . . qualities you attribute to me. But thank you.” and the B in But is capitalized, as if it were added as an after thought. I would of expected there to be a comma, so it would read, . . . qualities you attribute to me, but thank you. She also does not indicate a further interest in talking OR getting together either.
That they are getting married speaks volumes of his persistence, AND his agility to filter out women that may only want him for his 100’s of millions.
Oh yeah, the story is on going. I pray what happened to McCartney does not happen to Mr. Henry.

sandros
May 5, 2009 7:48

Mark to me is beyond natural game,
has pua knowledge ,skill and practicality…best of all he can teach it.

awesome insight to this man,great post.

Leo
May 13, 2009 22:27

“I tried to emphasize the point that at no point did he “give up his power” as Tyler Durden would say. This is a HUGE point for guys to understand about emotional connection, because most guys who get good at this automatically assume that anything that makes you emotionally vulnerable = chodey and needy. Not true. Pussies use their emotional vulnerability to because they’re putting the woman on a pedestal. This guy isn’t. He even says, “you don’t need to respond, I just wanted to let you know.” From an inner game perspective, he’s not being needy in the slightest, what he’s conveying is complete genuine interest — which, as we know, is one of the biggest turn-ons in a woman.”

“I threw this up because this is an example contrary to typical PUA pick ups in a lot of ways. It’s good because it gets us thinking “outside the box.” And not only that, but if we’re going to have any theories about attraction and pick up, they need to be consistent in all situations, not just club skanks and college girls.”

Mark, this article is awesome. IMO, you are the best PUA out there. You analyze every situation to its minimum detail and if you have to, you go against the classical community theory, wich it means, real life. Two thumbs up. This article is an example of how much I’ve wasted my time with the community dogmas.
Muchas Gracias.

Leave a Reply

Comment

Most Popular Content

News - Sep 29, 2010 5:34 - 8 Comments

New Site, Blog Moved

More In News


PUA Skills - Sep 10, 2010 14:40 - 18 Comments

Pick Up is NOT a Skill

More In PUA Skills


Other, PUA Theory - May 23, 2010 10:50 - 8 Comments

Styles and Locality

More In PUA Theory