Dallas PUA

So tonight, New Years eve, I hosted a small party. Four girls and two guys.

The other guy was a date for one of the girls. First time I met him. So anyway, we're socializing, shooting the shit, and we decided to play apples to apples. Now the game doesn't really matter, but what does is the AMOGing attempts when the other guy was playing. He tried to AMOG on intelligence, making obscure references to Cuba, middle ages bullshit, etc.. He attempted to AMOG on looks, and on social awareness.

For the most part, I was completely nonreactive. I did on like the fifth AMOGing attempt pop back at him and shut him up, because it was starting to wear thin. So I think I handled this right on one hand because two of the girls told me after they left that they though he was an asshole, and one left early so Im pretty sure that he came off the same way to her.I interpret this to mean that he gave them a negative impression. However, I'm also spending the night alone, and not by choice, which means that I probably didn't handle things right either. I am not sure if completely non-reactive is the way to go here. It seems like I could have potentially made the party better if I had handled the AMOGing better.

Is being nonreactive the best way to go here, or, is there a better way? I am not sure there is, but wanted to ask for opinions.

I'm not an expert on amog'ing, but I think you handled one aspect correctly, by not letting affect you. However, when you just let him amog you, then you look like a beta.

The girls thought he was an asshole and probably thought you were "nice." is that what you really want?

You don't have to get into a pissing contest with the guy, but trying to diffuse his attempts is aboslutely nescessary.

Here's a good article on how to handle amog: [url]http://www.the-spearhead.com/2009/10/09/friday-night-game-handling-alpha-male-interlopers/[/url]

here's a thread I started on using a specific technique to handle amog tactics: [url]http://www.dallaslair.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5480[/url]

In your situation here is what I would have done...

Every time he talked about some obscure BS I would have made funny faces to the girls - what I call "royalty" faces. I would get that high and mighty look. The girls would have laughed.

On one of his silly attempts I would have said "Does this guy know how to party or what!!!"

In re: your question, no, I don't think being non-reactive is the way to go. The guy was talking about shit that girls simply don't care about. It would have been easy to poke a little fun at him and make the girls laugh. As it stands you let him dominate the evening.

FYI - Being called an asshole is a good thing.

Better luck next time and happy new year!

[QUOTE=Lion;38980]FYI - Being called an asshole is a good thing.[/QUOTE]


Better to be called an asshole than not mentioned at all.

And, being nonreactionary regarding an AMOG attempt is not the best thing. Think of it like boxing. When he throws a punch, you have counter eventually otherwise you'll never win the bout.

[QUOTE=traxxus;38977]So tonight, New Years eve, I hosted a small party. Four girls and two guys.

The other guy was a date for one of the girls. First time I met him. So anyway, we're socializing, shooting the shit, and we decided to play apples to apples. Now the game doesn't really matter, but what does is the AMOGing attempts when the other guy was playing. He tried to AMOG on intelligence, making obscure references to Cuba, middle ages bullshit, etc.. He attempted to AMOG on looks, and on social awareness.[/QUOTE]

What were the AMOG attempts? Was he showing off or was he putting you down? How does a guy "AMOG on intelligence"? Was he simply demonstrating that he's intelligent? I'm trying to figure out if he was DHVing (maybe too hard) or AMOGing you.

[quote]For the most part, I was completely nonreactive. I did on like the fifth AMOGing attempt pop back at him and shut him up, because it was starting to wear thin. So I think I handled this right on one hand because two of the girls told me after they left that they though he was an asshole, and one left early so Im pretty sure that he came off the same way to her.I interpret this to mean that he gave them a negative impression. However, I'm also spending the night alone, and not by choice, which means that I probably didn't handle things right either. I am not sure if completely non-reactive is the way to go here. It seems like I could have potentially made the party better if I had handled the AMOGing better.

Is being nonreactive the best way to go here, or, is there a better way? I am not sure there is, but wanted to ask for opinions.[/quote]

If the girls made a point to tell you that the guy was an asshole, maybe you communicated that he bothered you.

I like Lion's response the best. I would have said something like, "dude, that's awesome! You just went medieval on all of us!" By giving validation, you're being alpha in a meta-level sort of way, which is more powerful than his lame DHV attempts.

Unfortunately at this point, I've forgotten most of what he said, but remembered how I felt about it. Isn't that like most insults that people hit you with, all flash no substance, so the feeling sticks with you longer than the words?

It was stuff like quoting Voltair and then following up with, "you do know who Voltair is, don't you?" or verbatum, after an obscure off the wall observation, "Am I the only one who finds learning new things to be fun?" Basically the guy was being a douche, and I should have handled it differently. I'm more pissed at myself that I wasn't prepared for it then I am at the douche.

In hindsight, I think Lion's approach is right on, and I will make that my default reply for things like this in the future. If I go any harsher, then I risk alienating the other people I am hosting. If I go any softer and it looks like I'm kowtowing to the bastard.

If I chain Lion's soft negs together after every attempt I am entertaining everyone and if the douche doesn't get the message and gets more aggressive then he's already lost.

Being non-reactive doesn't necessarily mean being silent. It means you don't change your state or say something out of character. If you throw out some comments and you're congruent with it, then you're not really being reactive. Just stay within your own frame.

You don't have to AMOG him back. In fact, if you can manage the interaction so he's actually adding to the fun, then that's a major DHV for you, as long as you're in control.
"Voltair? Yeah, that's the guy who designed my shirt."
"Fuck yeah! Let's all drink to learning!"
"Woah! That's it! This guy is my phone-a-friend!"

[QUOTE=Rhody;38994]Being non-reactive doesn't necessarily mean being silent. It means you don't change your state or say something out of character. If you throw out some comments and you're congruent with it, then you're not really being reactive. Just stay within your own frame.

You don't have to AMOG him back. In fact, if you can manage the interaction so he's actually adding to the fun, then that's a major DHV for you, as long as you're in control.
"Voltair? Yeah, that's the guy who designed my shirt."
"Fuck yeah! Let's all drink to learning!"
"Woah! That's it! This guy is my phone-a-friend!"[/QUOTE]


I agree 100% here. It's easy for us to take someone else's responses and believe that they should be our own as well. This is why having a board like this is so great, we learn each other's personalities then provide input regarding what we would do so the original poster can find the actions/words/responses/game/etc. that fits best with their personality.

Rhody's right, it's all about what's congruent to your personality, your real personality not what you believe it to be.

For example, I can definitely say there are things that Lion does that I could never pull off because it doesn't fit my personality on the flip side there are things that I do that would hurt Lion because it doesn't fit his personality. Keep that in mind.

In fact, Rhody's responses may be better suited to you than Lion's. Hard to say in a definitive manner but it seems like you're a pretty amicable guy and, given the situation (i.e. your house, your party, you're the host, etc.), then being more inclusionary while being fun would have been the best way to go. If it's not your house, then you can AMOG/neg him a little harder. Other than that, treat his comments as they the childish comments that they are and turn them into something fun then get on with the party that you're hosting.