What do you think?
Rate this book
The Game and Rules of the Game
The Game recounts the incredible adventures of an everyday man who transforms himself from a shy, awkward writer into the quick-witted, smooth-talking Style, a character irresistible to women. But just when life is better than he could have ever dreamed (he uses his techniques on Britney Spears, receives life coaching from Tom Cruise, moves into a mansion with Courtney Love and is officially voted the World's Number One Pickup Artist) he falls head over heels for a woman who can beat him at his own game.
If you want to play The Game you need to know The Rules. This book is not a story. It is a how-to book. This Stylelife Challenge is not meant to be read. It is meant to be performed. Whatever experience level you have, whatever strengths and weaknesses you may have, whether you're a virgin or a Don Juan, the stage has been set for you to perform at your highest capacity. The Stylelife Challenge is a simple, easy-to-follow guide to the basics of approaching and attracting women. The Challenge is simply what works best and fastest. Neil Strauss spent four years gathering this knowledge, living it and sharing it. He's tested the specific material in this book on over 13,000 men of varying ages, nationalities and backgrounds. Part practical application and part sequel, this is the further adventures of Style and his game techniques. The result: A month-long workout program for your social, attraction, dating and seduction skills.
If you want to play The Game you need to know The Rules. This book is not a story. It is a how-to book. This Stylelife Challenge is not meant to be read. It is meant to be performed. Whatever experience level you have, whatever strengths and weaknesses you may have, whether you're a virgin or a Don Juan, the stage has been set for you to perform at your highest capacity. The Stylelife Challenge is a simple, easy-to-follow guide to the basics of approaching and attracting women. The Challenge is simply what works best and fastest. Neil Strauss spent four years gathering this knowledge, living it and sharing it. He's tested the specific material in this book on over 13,000 men of varying ages, nationalities and backgrounds. Part practical application and part sequel, this is the further adventures of Style and his game techniques. The result: A month-long workout program for your social, attraction, dating and seduction skills.
938 pages, Kindle Edition
First published December 18, 2007
504 people are currently reading
3,388 people want to read
About the author
Neil Strauss
46books1,732followersNeil Strauss is the author of the New York Times bestsellers The Game, Rules of the Game, Emergency, and Everyone Loves You When You're Dead. He is also the coauthor of four other bestsellers--Jenna Jameson's How to Make Love Like a Porn Star, Mötley Crüe's The Dirt, and Marilyn Manson's The Long Hard Road Out of Hell, and Dave Navarro's Don't Try This at Home. He can be found at .
His latest book, The Truth: An Uncomfortable Book About Relationships, was released on October 13. The review in Grantland described it as follows:
"I want you to read this book. I want your partners to read this book. I want your families, your friends, your coworkers, and your colleagues to read this book. I want women to read it, and men -- especially men -- to read it. But more than that, I want you to think critically about it, about what it says about you and the world around you and your romantic relationships. I want it to inspire you to dig deep inside yourself and figure out what's stopping you from making yourself happy: I want it to inspire you to embrace and engage with love, in an honest and healthy way."
His latest book, The Truth: An Uncomfortable Book About Relationships, was released on October 13. The review in Grantland described it as follows:
"I want you to read this book. I want your partners to read this book. I want your families, your friends, your coworkers, and your colleagues to read this book. I want women to read it, and men -- especially men -- to read it. But more than that, I want you to think critically about it, about what it says about you and the world around you and your romantic relationships. I want it to inspire you to dig deep inside yourself and figure out what's stopping you from making yourself happy: I want it to inspire you to embrace and engage with love, in an honest and healthy way."
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 107 reviews
June 1, 2013
There’s a class of self-help books for men, books with bold titles like “ROAR OF THE MAN-WARRIOR� and “THE SEX GOD WITHIN� that promise explosive increases in sex/money/power/general satisfaction of desire for any man with stones enough to take the plunge. This book is one of them. It was literally thrown at me by my helpful roommate one dark day when my romantic despair was so intense it was almost bending the light around my head.
I’d heard tell of the book before, of PickUp Artist-ry and its profound potential to transform you into a Randian Titan of pure will with respect to the female connections you want in your life. I’d also heard that PickUp makes you into a horrible misogynist asshole, framing women as sexual-gatekeepers to be manipulated and even tricked into giving up the warmth between their legs if that’s you really want them to do. I did my sincere best to bracket that noise and come at it fresh and open to new ideas and experience, figuring I could just take the good and laugh at the bad(1).
See, humans and human connections and humanity in general are deeply important to me both concretely and conceptually, kind of replacing capital-G God in my little cosmology(2). But they/you (humans) are complicated and hard. Human interaction more often than not leaves me feeling fried and drained and in desperate need of several hours of solid solitude. Being on stage isn’t too bad - the audience blurs together into a nameless homogenous mass and I get really plugged-in to whatever it is that I’m talking about and my self-consciousness slips away and it’s somehow both exhilarating and peaceful at the same time. But one-on-one the task of weaving my emotions into the immediate experience that I share with another concrete human being is a different beast altogether.
So that’s the ladder I wanted to climb when I opened this book. I wanted more tools for human interaction, more confidence(3) in my ability to interact with humans in ways that don’t include transparently interrogating them or steering the conversation to a technical topic I like so I can show off the stuff I’ve been thinking about lately. With rare exceptions girls(4) don’t respond to discursive seductions with much positivity, that kind of human interaction taking as its medium the language of looks and smiles(5) rather that the intricate grunts and marks that make up my textual relationships.
But enough about me(6). This particular book opens(7) by jarring you to get your attention, the first page having a big READ ME title and the rest of the intro spent mostly mocking you for being so weak as to mindlessly follow orders. This is gimmicky and dumb. There’s one sentence where the author takes it back, but it doesn’t really matter - what does matter is that from the very outset this guy has established presence and power, which is basically what he claims he can give to you if you buckle down and do exactly what he says.
The rest of the book follows this tone, with terse imperative sentences describing your ‘missions�, giving you your ‘daily briefings�, lauding the brand of the Stylelife(8) Challenge and the in-group of the ‘Challengers� that now includes you in their epic community of men who have lifted the wool from their eyes and have unlocked the badass secrets of masculinity and attraction and power.
The military con- and de-notations are definitely intentional. My most sympathetic interpretation would be that most people need this kind of hardass discipline if they’re going to seriously step outside of their comfort zone, and the fuck-you attitude of the writing style can serve as a source thereof if the feeble reader can’t conjure the man-juice from within(9).
The book’s divvied up into 30 days worth of the prenominate missions and briefings, and the reader is advised (or, rather, ordered) to read the book one day at a time and do every single thing as-instructed. No reading ahead, no skipping out on assignments. There are a few fields for you to fill out answers to questions, some good (what are your strengths and goals in life) and some bad (explain with detail exactly how you will suffer if you fail to change your broken ways).
The calendar is supposed to take you from the zero at which you start to getting a date, defined as any agreement to meet with a woman after first meeting her as a stranger. The author goes over Opening, Demonstrating Value, Disqualifying(i.e. making her work for it), etc. I didn’t encounter the notorious ‘Negging� wherein you insult and generally try to hurt a girl to get an emotional reaction from her(10), which was nice. There was indeed some positive and good advice to be found, such as making human interaction about enriching other people rather than satisfying some desperate need of yours for sex and affirmation(11). Also worth attention is the idea of just having fun wherever you go, bringing value and positive-vibes into your own life and into the lives of others no matter what the ups and downs of what happens to you over the course of any given evening.
But. The good advice is vague and can be found from other more-robust sources. What makes this book less-robust is the lengthy digressions on NeuroLinguistic Programming, Astrology, Psychic readings, and Evolutionary Psychology. By EvoPsych I mean the “listen, girls just want to fuck your money� type of pop-crap that justifies a nasty STEM-brand of gender-essentialism which makes much of the Internet the misogynistic hellscape that it is. So that’s where the book lost me. The Missions involved a lot of this, explicitly telling you to go out and engage girls about, say, how the rings on their fingers predict the planets they were born under and the personality implications thereof, etc. I can’t do that. Really.
Once I checked out I slammed through the rest of the book, chuckling over the author’s little admonitions against not doing the homework, and now we’re here.
What did I learn? Some things! It is generally good to be happy and fun and playful when you’re out and about, and I’m a bit better at conjuring and expressing that kind of social feeling now. So that’s good. Also well and fine is the attention to nonverbal detail the book helped illuminate - as mentioned somewhere in here I feel way more conscious and aware of words and abstract stuff(see (6)) and that’s generally how I interface with humans (i.e. perceiving much of identity through word-choice and -style) and that’s definitely not going to help anyone do anything on a crowded dance floor.
But that’s like 28% of the book right there. The rest kind of sucks and it’s delivered like the text is biblical. It kind of inspired that kind of reaction(i.e. holy) from its fans when I mentioned I was reading the thing, the eyes widening and the head tilting back and a serious smile breaking out as they remember and behold the book’s total glory once again. Not me.
I don’t plan on instantiating a system when I interact with you, regardless of how I feel about you. Not here, not anywhere, not ever. You’re worth sincerity and spontaneity and actual candor, including the kind that I can only really find in writing. For better or for worse I think rawness and openness and serious-togetherness are all we can really hope for - some beautiful people live this lovely life effortlessly, and the rest of us can only try .
ADDENDA
(1) I think it’s a fine and important exercise to read books that are morally questionable and/or endorsed by people you hate. I tend to come away with a better understanding of my ideas, of the ideas of my enemies, and with a deeper appreciation for how someone like me might conceivably believe something horrible like that.
(2) This cosmological ‘foundation� used to be capital-S Science as a way of communing with the capital-U Universe, captured in the Saganite aphorism “we are a way for the Universe to understand itself�. I’ve long since shed the idea that reality has a preferred description of itself, that we have epistemic duties towards any kind non-human power. I think atheism has conceptual consequences that my old New Atheist movement glosses over and ignores (basically keeping God but stripping it of its personality), but it (the movement) remains a step (rather than a leap) in a good atheistic direction.
(3) I think the deepest reason that people read books like these and consider them to be a success is because like 85% of inter-human success comes from having the self-assurance to take any action at all.
(4) Here I mean ‘girls� in the sense of casually referring to younger females the same way ‘guys� casually refers to younger males. I know there’s a bunch of problems with the word with its diminutive connotations, but ‘Females� seems sterile and ‘Women� to me implies (following Louis C.K.(4.1)) childbearing and much more life-experience than had by the my-age people I generally find myself attracted to. Gender-reference is a real head-clutcher and as a creature of almost-maximal privilege(4.2) I really do my sincere best to not accidentally oppress anybody, and I’m sorry if I fail.
(4.1) Contrary to the hopes and dreams of immature people everywhere Louis C.K. emphatically did NOT make the word ‘faggot� somehow okay to use. Hearing that word used makes me want to gather a crowd and publically push my thumbs into the offending vocal chords.
(4.2) Sub-maximal since little-ol�-me is neither super-rich nor Christian.
(5) Tolstoy’s words, but man do I wish they were my own.
(6) Just kidding. As half-alluded to somewhere around the main text(6.1) textuality is where I’m at my most relaxed and spontaneous and present, inhering in here with every word, so even when I’m not explicitly referenced every inch of this piece is soaked and saturated with my identity. At least until you read it, then you’re in here with me too. Hi.
(6.1) I’d really like to index the main-text to more effectively link back and forth between the footnotes and main-text words/sentences/paragraphs, but I feel like hyper-indexicality’s the kind of PoMo metafuckery that’d be better left for another day. But man will it be fun.
(7) In this book ‘open� is treated as a half-technical term, basically referring to the action of starting a conversation with someone you’re interested in. This, to me, is the single hardest part of being in public.
(8) Seriously.
(9) This is almost too silly but I’m leaving it in anyway.
(10) From what I've heard from the girls that I’ve talked to about dating a lot of guys seriously will do this. For all the male bitching and moaning about having to deal with huge amounts of rejection from women it seems also and even more-so true that the acts of selection and rejection take their own heavy emotional toll, especially when some guys will do literally anything to provoke a response from you.
(11) It’s really easy to run these two together, unfortunately.
I’d heard tell of the book before, of PickUp Artist-ry and its profound potential to transform you into a Randian Titan of pure will with respect to the female connections you want in your life. I’d also heard that PickUp makes you into a horrible misogynist asshole, framing women as sexual-gatekeepers to be manipulated and even tricked into giving up the warmth between their legs if that’s you really want them to do. I did my sincere best to bracket that noise and come at it fresh and open to new ideas and experience, figuring I could just take the good and laugh at the bad(1).
See, humans and human connections and humanity in general are deeply important to me both concretely and conceptually, kind of replacing capital-G God in my little cosmology(2). But they/you (humans) are complicated and hard. Human interaction more often than not leaves me feeling fried and drained and in desperate need of several hours of solid solitude. Being on stage isn’t too bad - the audience blurs together into a nameless homogenous mass and I get really plugged-in to whatever it is that I’m talking about and my self-consciousness slips away and it’s somehow both exhilarating and peaceful at the same time. But one-on-one the task of weaving my emotions into the immediate experience that I share with another concrete human being is a different beast altogether.
So that’s the ladder I wanted to climb when I opened this book. I wanted more tools for human interaction, more confidence(3) in my ability to interact with humans in ways that don’t include transparently interrogating them or steering the conversation to a technical topic I like so I can show off the stuff I’ve been thinking about lately. With rare exceptions girls(4) don’t respond to discursive seductions with much positivity, that kind of human interaction taking as its medium the language of looks and smiles(5) rather that the intricate grunts and marks that make up my textual relationships.
But enough about me(6). This particular book opens(7) by jarring you to get your attention, the first page having a big READ ME title and the rest of the intro spent mostly mocking you for being so weak as to mindlessly follow orders. This is gimmicky and dumb. There’s one sentence where the author takes it back, but it doesn’t really matter - what does matter is that from the very outset this guy has established presence and power, which is basically what he claims he can give to you if you buckle down and do exactly what he says.
The rest of the book follows this tone, with terse imperative sentences describing your ‘missions�, giving you your ‘daily briefings�, lauding the brand of the Stylelife(8) Challenge and the in-group of the ‘Challengers� that now includes you in their epic community of men who have lifted the wool from their eyes and have unlocked the badass secrets of masculinity and attraction and power.
The military con- and de-notations are definitely intentional. My most sympathetic interpretation would be that most people need this kind of hardass discipline if they’re going to seriously step outside of their comfort zone, and the fuck-you attitude of the writing style can serve as a source thereof if the feeble reader can’t conjure the man-juice from within(9).
The book’s divvied up into 30 days worth of the prenominate missions and briefings, and the reader is advised (or, rather, ordered) to read the book one day at a time and do every single thing as-instructed. No reading ahead, no skipping out on assignments. There are a few fields for you to fill out answers to questions, some good (what are your strengths and goals in life) and some bad (explain with detail exactly how you will suffer if you fail to change your broken ways).
The calendar is supposed to take you from the zero at which you start to getting a date, defined as any agreement to meet with a woman after first meeting her as a stranger. The author goes over Opening, Demonstrating Value, Disqualifying(i.e. making her work for it), etc. I didn’t encounter the notorious ‘Negging� wherein you insult and generally try to hurt a girl to get an emotional reaction from her(10), which was nice. There was indeed some positive and good advice to be found, such as making human interaction about enriching other people rather than satisfying some desperate need of yours for sex and affirmation(11). Also worth attention is the idea of just having fun wherever you go, bringing value and positive-vibes into your own life and into the lives of others no matter what the ups and downs of what happens to you over the course of any given evening.
But. The good advice is vague and can be found from other more-robust sources. What makes this book less-robust is the lengthy digressions on NeuroLinguistic Programming, Astrology, Psychic readings, and Evolutionary Psychology. By EvoPsych I mean the “listen, girls just want to fuck your money� type of pop-crap that justifies a nasty STEM-brand of gender-essentialism which makes much of the Internet the misogynistic hellscape that it is. So that’s where the book lost me. The Missions involved a lot of this, explicitly telling you to go out and engage girls about, say, how the rings on their fingers predict the planets they were born under and the personality implications thereof, etc. I can’t do that. Really.
Once I checked out I slammed through the rest of the book, chuckling over the author’s little admonitions against not doing the homework, and now we’re here.
What did I learn? Some things! It is generally good to be happy and fun and playful when you’re out and about, and I’m a bit better at conjuring and expressing that kind of social feeling now. So that’s good. Also well and fine is the attention to nonverbal detail the book helped illuminate - as mentioned somewhere in here I feel way more conscious and aware of words and abstract stuff(see (6)) and that’s generally how I interface with humans (i.e. perceiving much of identity through word-choice and -style) and that’s definitely not going to help anyone do anything on a crowded dance floor.
But that’s like 28% of the book right there. The rest kind of sucks and it’s delivered like the text is biblical. It kind of inspired that kind of reaction(i.e. holy) from its fans when I mentioned I was reading the thing, the eyes widening and the head tilting back and a serious smile breaking out as they remember and behold the book’s total glory once again. Not me.
I don’t plan on instantiating a system when I interact with you, regardless of how I feel about you. Not here, not anywhere, not ever. You’re worth sincerity and spontaneity and actual candor, including the kind that I can only really find in writing. For better or for worse I think rawness and openness and serious-togetherness are all we can really hope for - some beautiful people live this lovely life effortlessly, and the rest of us can only try .
ADDENDA
(1) I think it’s a fine and important exercise to read books that are morally questionable and/or endorsed by people you hate. I tend to come away with a better understanding of my ideas, of the ideas of my enemies, and with a deeper appreciation for how someone like me might conceivably believe something horrible like that.
(2) This cosmological ‘foundation� used to be capital-S Science as a way of communing with the capital-U Universe, captured in the Saganite aphorism “we are a way for the Universe to understand itself�. I’ve long since shed the idea that reality has a preferred description of itself, that we have epistemic duties towards any kind non-human power. I think atheism has conceptual consequences that my old New Atheist movement glosses over and ignores (basically keeping God but stripping it of its personality), but it (the movement) remains a step (rather than a leap) in a good atheistic direction.
(3) I think the deepest reason that people read books like these and consider them to be a success is because like 85% of inter-human success comes from having the self-assurance to take any action at all.
(4) Here I mean ‘girls� in the sense of casually referring to younger females the same way ‘guys� casually refers to younger males. I know there’s a bunch of problems with the word with its diminutive connotations, but ‘Females� seems sterile and ‘Women� to me implies (following Louis C.K.(4.1)) childbearing and much more life-experience than had by the my-age people I generally find myself attracted to. Gender-reference is a real head-clutcher and as a creature of almost-maximal privilege(4.2) I really do my sincere best to not accidentally oppress anybody, and I’m sorry if I fail.
(4.1) Contrary to the hopes and dreams of immature people everywhere Louis C.K. emphatically did NOT make the word ‘faggot� somehow okay to use. Hearing that word used makes me want to gather a crowd and publically push my thumbs into the offending vocal chords.
(4.2) Sub-maximal since little-ol�-me is neither super-rich nor Christian.
(5) Tolstoy’s words, but man do I wish they were my own.
(6) Just kidding. As half-alluded to somewhere around the main text(6.1) textuality is where I’m at my most relaxed and spontaneous and present, inhering in here with every word, so even when I’m not explicitly referenced every inch of this piece is soaked and saturated with my identity. At least until you read it, then you’re in here with me too. Hi.
(6.1) I’d really like to index the main-text to more effectively link back and forth between the footnotes and main-text words/sentences/paragraphs, but I feel like hyper-indexicality’s the kind of PoMo metafuckery that’d be better left for another day. But man will it be fun.
(7) In this book ‘open� is treated as a half-technical term, basically referring to the action of starting a conversation with someone you’re interested in. This, to me, is the single hardest part of being in public.
(8) Seriously.
(9) This is almost too silly but I’m leaving it in anyway.
(10) From what I've heard from the girls that I’ve talked to about dating a lot of guys seriously will do this. For all the male bitching and moaning about having to deal with huge amounts of rejection from women it seems also and even more-so true that the acts of selection and rejection take their own heavy emotional toll, especially when some guys will do literally anything to provoke a response from you.
(11) It’s really easy to run these two together, unfortunately.
August 14, 2011
Some notes:
One exercise: call a wrong number and get the person who answers to recommend a movie. "The point isn't just to talk with strangers. It's to learn how to change the course of an interaction without making the other person uncomfortable." - p29
"'Rejection' is another word that has been misused and misrepresented. The dictionary definition of 'reject" is 'to refuse to accept.' So if you offer someone a stick of gum, and she says 'No thanks,' you've been rejected. Do you feel an emotional sting? Probably not. / If you invite someone to a social event, and she says 'No thanks,' it shouldn't be any different. But for most people it is different, and here's why: When the gum is rejected, we think the person doesn't want the gum. But when we extend and invitation and get rejected, we think she doesn't want us. / But how could she possibly have decided she doesn't want us? She's known us only for a short while. She's practically a complete stranger. She doesn't know how great we are, the way our friends and family do. Why do we value her opinion over theirs?" - p50
"You can open by saying almost anything when you're confident, congruent, and upbeat....Next time you see someone you want to talk to, open your mouth and say the first thing that comes to mind. As long as your comment or question isn't rude or hostile, you may be surprised by how difficult it is to get solidly rejected." - p51
"Chris Rock has a routine in which he explains that anything a man says to a woman translates as 'How about some dick?'" Your goal is to start a conversation with a woman without saying 'How about some dick?'" - p56
"Make sure you pay attention to the men in a group. If they feel you're not respecting or acknowledging them, they'll try to end the interaction." - p59
Don't open by asking a question; they can say no and shut you down. Don't begin by apologizing; "starting a conversation this way makes you sound insecure at best and like a panhandler at worst." - p59
One of the best openers is to get advice on a personal story. You can get opinions, start a conversation. - p60
Good openers have a root (why you're asking) and a time constraint (to reassure that you're not going to stick around forever). - p63
"There is no such thing as rejection, only feedback." - p69
"Who do you blame when something goes wrong during an approach? If you catch yourself saying a situation was impossible, the guys were jerks, or the woman was just a 'bitch,' then you're wrong. It's your fault. It's always your fault. And that's a good thing, because it means you're in control." - p69
"To disqualify a woman, demonstrate early in an interaction that you're not interested in her. Even though you may be chasing her, disqualification turns the tables and makes her want to chase you." - p74
But don't disqualify a woman who might feel you're out of her league. - p75
Women test men. "Men normally sit there answering the questions like they're on a game show, hoping that if they accumulate enough points, she'll choose them. What they don't realize is that they're losing points simply by submitting to the test." - p75
Couple disqualification with qualification (acceptance): the push-pull. - p77
On the differences between men and women: There is "research estimating that 75% of gay men in San Francisco have had more than one hundred partners (25% have had more than one thousand), while in contrast most lesbians have had fewer than ten partners in their lifetime." - p110
"Over dinner one night, the Stylelife coaches and I were reviewing the topics women seem to enjoy discussing most. One was relationships, another was spirituality, and a third was animals." - p222
"See that guy over there? He just told me he knows kung fu. Why do you think he would say that to me out of the blue?" - p226
"Can you hold on to this for a sec? ... Thanks ... A friend of mine taught me that the best way to butt into a conversation is to give someone something to hold. And I wanted to test it out." - p227
Good bar trick: the five questions bet. - p235
Good way to ramp up physicality: the quadruple hand test, Style's kiss close. - p255, p257
"As she hit the mattress, a giggle dislodged." - p309
"I once told the story of Sleeping Beauty to a young cousin of mine. 'How can a prince fall in love with a girl who's sleeping?' she asked afterward." - p331
"Every single man needs a sexually adventurous woman to distract him from the fact that he's unloved." - p333
One exercise: call a wrong number and get the person who answers to recommend a movie. "The point isn't just to talk with strangers. It's to learn how to change the course of an interaction without making the other person uncomfortable." - p29
"'Rejection' is another word that has been misused and misrepresented. The dictionary definition of 'reject" is 'to refuse to accept.' So if you offer someone a stick of gum, and she says 'No thanks,' you've been rejected. Do you feel an emotional sting? Probably not. / If you invite someone to a social event, and she says 'No thanks,' it shouldn't be any different. But for most people it is different, and here's why: When the gum is rejected, we think the person doesn't want the gum. But when we extend and invitation and get rejected, we think she doesn't want us. / But how could she possibly have decided she doesn't want us? She's known us only for a short while. She's practically a complete stranger. She doesn't know how great we are, the way our friends and family do. Why do we value her opinion over theirs?" - p50
"You can open by saying almost anything when you're confident, congruent, and upbeat....Next time you see someone you want to talk to, open your mouth and say the first thing that comes to mind. As long as your comment or question isn't rude or hostile, you may be surprised by how difficult it is to get solidly rejected." - p51
"Chris Rock has a routine in which he explains that anything a man says to a woman translates as 'How about some dick?'" Your goal is to start a conversation with a woman without saying 'How about some dick?'" - p56
"Make sure you pay attention to the men in a group. If they feel you're not respecting or acknowledging them, they'll try to end the interaction." - p59
Don't open by asking a question; they can say no and shut you down. Don't begin by apologizing; "starting a conversation this way makes you sound insecure at best and like a panhandler at worst." - p59
One of the best openers is to get advice on a personal story. You can get opinions, start a conversation. - p60
Good openers have a root (why you're asking) and a time constraint (to reassure that you're not going to stick around forever). - p63
"There is no such thing as rejection, only feedback." - p69
"Who do you blame when something goes wrong during an approach? If you catch yourself saying a situation was impossible, the guys were jerks, or the woman was just a 'bitch,' then you're wrong. It's your fault. It's always your fault. And that's a good thing, because it means you're in control." - p69
"To disqualify a woman, demonstrate early in an interaction that you're not interested in her. Even though you may be chasing her, disqualification turns the tables and makes her want to chase you." - p74
But don't disqualify a woman who might feel you're out of her league. - p75
Women test men. "Men normally sit there answering the questions like they're on a game show, hoping that if they accumulate enough points, she'll choose them. What they don't realize is that they're losing points simply by submitting to the test." - p75
Couple disqualification with qualification (acceptance): the push-pull. - p77
On the differences between men and women: There is "research estimating that 75% of gay men in San Francisco have had more than one hundred partners (25% have had more than one thousand), while in contrast most lesbians have had fewer than ten partners in their lifetime." - p110
"Over dinner one night, the Stylelife coaches and I were reviewing the topics women seem to enjoy discussing most. One was relationships, another was spirituality, and a third was animals." - p222
"See that guy over there? He just told me he knows kung fu. Why do you think he would say that to me out of the blue?" - p226
"Can you hold on to this for a sec? ... Thanks ... A friend of mine taught me that the best way to butt into a conversation is to give someone something to hold. And I wanted to test it out." - p227
Good bar trick: the five questions bet. - p235
Good way to ramp up physicality: the quadruple hand test, Style's kiss close. - p255, p257
"As she hit the mattress, a giggle dislodged." - p309
"I once told the story of Sleeping Beauty to a young cousin of mine. 'How can a prince fall in love with a girl who's sleeping?' she asked afterward." - p331
"Every single man needs a sexually adventurous woman to distract him from the fact that he's unloved." - p333
January 27, 2014
I hated this book and everything is stands for. I hated how it made me feel (stupid, pathetic, manipulated) and I hated recognising some of my favourite friends in it. It made me hate men, hate women, utterly despise the so-called rules of life that many seem to live by, knowingly or not. It depressed me. Ugh shoot me for reading it. Slap me for wanting to read it again. It gets 4 stars from me for making me so angry and being so right about how stupid we all are.
February 6, 2008
This book creates a 30 day 'bootcamp' to help train any man to improve his 'game' Each day, the book provides exercises and learning outcomes to help each man build out his repertoire and confidence when talking and approaching women.
I have read a number of books about picking up chicks to hone my game. The top three are the mystery method, How to be successful with women, and this book.
If you want to start dating better women, get those three books. I promise you a more exciting and rewarding dating life lies ahead.
The second book wasn't too special. But if you are starting out and / or have a hard time approaching women, the 30 day bootcamp is a great place to start.
I have read a number of books about picking up chicks to hone my game. The top three are the mystery method, How to be successful with women, and this book.
If you want to start dating better women, get those three books. I promise you a more exciting and rewarding dating life lies ahead.
The second book wasn't too special. But if you are starting out and / or have a hard time approaching women, the 30 day bootcamp is a great place to start.
December 22, 2014
I'm embarrassed to say that I read this book. More accurately, I read "The Game" but not "The Rules of the Game". I had heard and read a little bit about pick-up artists before, and it just so happened that a few weeks earlier I had come across Strauss' name online so I recognized it when I saw the book. My only defense is that the book was on a roommate's bookshelf and I so when I saw it my curiosity was piqued and I started reading. I suppose I gave the book two stars because it did keep my interest enough for me to finish, even though it also made me a little bit sick.
The biggest failing of this book, besides the repellent morality, is the ambiguous attitude Strauss takes towards the seduction game. He is self-aware enough to stand back and make fun of the failings of the pick-up community but he never betrays any awareness of the fact that turning seduction into a science and then making a game out of casual sex isn't a morally neutral activity. It's unfortunate because Strauss is in the position to write something so much better. The problem is that he wrote a one-sided account. We don't hear about what happened to the women he slept with afterwards. He justifies his life as a pick-up artist because it brought him confidence and self-respect but we never find out what it did for the emotional state of the women he seduced. If he had asked a few questions sexual ethics and consent then the book could have had a lot more depth. Is it really ethical to have a one night stand with another consenting adult if that person is using sex as an emotional band-aid, especially if she's had a bit to drink? Are the women looking to get self-worth from male attention as much as the men were deriving their self-worth from the female attention? If so, what are the after affects of all of this? Strauss never really raises any of these questions. Despite some cursory attempts to demonstrate otherwise, he comes across as completely self-centered, superficial and unsympathetic. You just can't spend an entire book ranking women's looks on a numbered scale, brag about getting the attention of the highest ranking ones, and not seem like a misogynist.
I must admit that I enjoyed the section about Courtney Love. She seemed like a really interesting character. The book was marred by the fact that I'm not sure to what extent it was true. I'm certain that he exaggerated the efficacy of his seduction abilities. It doesn't matter how many magic tricks he could do, I'm sure that women who do not rely on male attention for validation would not be seduced by superficial tricks for attention.
The biggest failing of this book, besides the repellent morality, is the ambiguous attitude Strauss takes towards the seduction game. He is self-aware enough to stand back and make fun of the failings of the pick-up community but he never betrays any awareness of the fact that turning seduction into a science and then making a game out of casual sex isn't a morally neutral activity. It's unfortunate because Strauss is in the position to write something so much better. The problem is that he wrote a one-sided account. We don't hear about what happened to the women he slept with afterwards. He justifies his life as a pick-up artist because it brought him confidence and self-respect but we never find out what it did for the emotional state of the women he seduced. If he had asked a few questions sexual ethics and consent then the book could have had a lot more depth. Is it really ethical to have a one night stand with another consenting adult if that person is using sex as an emotional band-aid, especially if she's had a bit to drink? Are the women looking to get self-worth from male attention as much as the men were deriving their self-worth from the female attention? If so, what are the after affects of all of this? Strauss never really raises any of these questions. Despite some cursory attempts to demonstrate otherwise, he comes across as completely self-centered, superficial and unsympathetic. You just can't spend an entire book ranking women's looks on a numbered scale, brag about getting the attention of the highest ranking ones, and not seem like a misogynist.
I must admit that I enjoyed the section about Courtney Love. She seemed like a really interesting character. The book was marred by the fact that I'm not sure to what extent it was true. I'm certain that he exaggerated the efficacy of his seduction abilities. It doesn't matter how many magic tricks he could do, I'm sure that women who do not rely on male attention for validation would not be seduced by superficial tricks for attention.
February 1, 2012
I think the book had some good points and was an enjoyable read. A person who follows the rules will definitely improve his (or even hers) social skills. I however doubt that it is possible to achieve all the goals in one month. The book also doesn't really offer any magical key for scoring that you wouldn't find in other self-help-ish books. Or maybe that's just how I see it - nobody have tried all of these "tricks" on me, so perhaps I'm wrong.
July 24, 2015
Although on the surface this can be seen as a book about learning the skills and various techniques of how to "pick up women", it is much more than that. Strauss is, in fact, teaching confidence, which is the ability to relax in social situations.
It's not necessarily about your looks, body shape etc, although he does deal with those aspects, too.
He attempts to set out in creating a better Self, that is modeled on who you actually are, rather than a faux you.
Some may see much of it as pointless, because they apply many of the techniques naturally and have confidence. The lucky few. But I have encountered many people out there, in the wide, wide world that don't have the natural assurance, knowhow and self-belief. Those people require some incentive, motivation, understanding and guidance. It's like anything else. If you learned badly at the start, or you experienced a bad initiation, then you need to re-learn or at least brush up on the obvious and understand where you are going wrong. It can't hurt, can it?
It's about creating a more attractive you.
It's about understanding the other half.
It's about creating good, realistic, achievable goals.
It's about using the skill you learn for good intent and not to simply manipulate.
It's about understanding what your primary motivation should be. Wrong motivation can be sensed by others & this is a NO NO if you want to make friends, (which is what it all boils down to, for me).
It's about getting out of your comfort zone and interacting, each time improving and growing in confidence.
It's about understanding how "all of the above" works.
Knowledge is power and in this case it will lead to a happier, more fulfilled life.
A pretty good read.
Sergiu Pobereznic (author)
It's not necessarily about your looks, body shape etc, although he does deal with those aspects, too.
He attempts to set out in creating a better Self, that is modeled on who you actually are, rather than a faux you.
Some may see much of it as pointless, because they apply many of the techniques naturally and have confidence. The lucky few. But I have encountered many people out there, in the wide, wide world that don't have the natural assurance, knowhow and self-belief. Those people require some incentive, motivation, understanding and guidance. It's like anything else. If you learned badly at the start, or you experienced a bad initiation, then you need to re-learn or at least brush up on the obvious and understand where you are going wrong. It can't hurt, can it?
It's about creating a more attractive you.
It's about understanding the other half.
It's about creating good, realistic, achievable goals.
It's about using the skill you learn for good intent and not to simply manipulate.
It's about understanding what your primary motivation should be. Wrong motivation can be sensed by others & this is a NO NO if you want to make friends, (which is what it all boils down to, for me).
It's about getting out of your comfort zone and interacting, each time improving and growing in confidence.
It's about understanding how "all of the above" works.
Knowledge is power and in this case it will lead to a happier, more fulfilled life.
A pretty good read.
Sergiu Pobereznic (author)
November 8, 2016
در حقیقت کتاب سه فصل داره که به ترتیب زیر هستند
1-The stylelife challenge
2-The routines collection
3-The style dairies
من کلاً سبک داستان نویسی نیل استراس (نویسنده ی کتاب) رو دوست ندارم برای همین از کتاب
The Game: Penetrating the Secret Society of Pickup Artists
اصلاً خوشم نیومد
به نظرم اون کتاب خ چرت بود
ولی قضیه ی دو فصل اول این کتاب فرق میکنه
نیل استراس استاد افسونگری است و ماهرانه و صد در صد تضمینی کمک میکنه که شما به مخ زنی بپردازید
:)))
اگه قرار باشه امتیاز بدم به فصل اول کتاب چهار ستاره میدم به فصل دوم پنج ستاره ولی فصل سوم یک ستاره هم زیاده شه
:)
-------------------
This book is about much more than just meeting and having sex with beautiful women. (Although, that is the primary motivation for guys to learn this stuff.) That is the biggest difference between Style's material and all the other master's stuff. Neil is teaching you to become a confident, socially adept person, not just a pickup machine.
By the way don't miss the part that contains "The Routines Collection," detailing scripts for successful interactions with women ;-)
1-The stylelife challenge
2-The routines collection
3-The style dairies
من کلاً سبک داستان نویسی نیل استراس (نویسنده ی کتاب) رو دوست ندارم برای همین از کتاب
The Game: Penetrating the Secret Society of Pickup Artists
اصلاً خوشم نیومد
به نظرم اون کتاب خ چرت بود
ولی قضیه ی دو فصل اول این کتاب فرق میکنه
نیل استراس استاد افسونگری است و ماهرانه و صد در صد تضمینی کمک میکنه که شما به مخ زنی بپردازید
:)))
اگه قرار باشه امتیاز بدم به فصل اول کتاب چهار ستاره میدم به فصل دوم پنج ستاره ولی فصل سوم یک ستاره هم زیاده شه
:)
-------------------
This book is about much more than just meeting and having sex with beautiful women. (Although, that is the primary motivation for guys to learn this stuff.) That is the biggest difference between Style's material and all the other master's stuff. Neil is teaching you to become a confident, socially adept person, not just a pickup machine.
By the way don't miss the part that contains "The Routines Collection," detailing scripts for successful interactions with women ;-)
December 24, 2014
Interesting dissection of human behaviour.
Not for everybody.
Not for everybody.
April 3, 2009
Just when you thought all the PUA stories were told, Neil cranks out another soon to be bestseller. A fascinating sequel to Strauss's groundbreaking pick up artist classic with a twist. The void of male social dynamics and pick up advice with substance is masterfully filled with the entry of Rules of the Game. His techniques are compelling, and his tales are infectious page turners.
This slickly packaged title is a two volume set. Its focus begins with establishing your identity, expectations and desires to better concentrate your efforts on your relationship goals. It dissects the psychology of female expectations, and lays out in classroom format the smooth adaptable skills that satisfy their wants and needs to create physical and an emotional connection.
Part one -the Stylelife Challenge is a 30 day instructional mental-workout program; the HOW TO for improving your social marketing; perfecting your personality, body language and image, creating sexual chemistry and attraction; virtually 100s of tips, exercises, and techniques, logically explained step by step.
What I really liked is he explains exactly how and why each facet of your studies works, and assigns you homework. You're forced to do somewhat uncomfortable things until you become a natural through repetition; till each skill is performed effortlessly. Each chapter builds and expands on the previous. After learning all 30 you've got the mindset and confidence to have Game.
Part 2 - The Style Diaries: fascinating to unusual stories from the trenches that focus on the unexpected bad results that occur due to bad decisions in the middle of encounters. It's the HOW NOT TO game women. As always, Neil's infamous story telling of underworld situations are riveting and bizarre, from conquests to hilarious train wrecks. Edge of your seat field reports brilliantly written. He hangs with the who's who of Rock Stars and travels the globe, injecting himself in situations most of us can only dream of. The conquests could be penned in a braggadocio style, but his writing is self-deprecating and fun; he's learning and laughing along with us. A contagious writing style.
Rules of the Game is a very unique concept, and needed to be written. The first title simply left too many men desiring all the PUA tools Style used in the previous title. It's an advanced classroom explaining how he learned to execute all the killer pulls of hot women in the Game. If you're reading this, you've probably already read Mystery's manual. I'd also highly suggest for deeper PUA psychology and a million laughs another bestseller in this genre.
This slickly packaged title is a two volume set. Its focus begins with establishing your identity, expectations and desires to better concentrate your efforts on your relationship goals. It dissects the psychology of female expectations, and lays out in classroom format the smooth adaptable skills that satisfy their wants and needs to create physical and an emotional connection.
Part one -the Stylelife Challenge is a 30 day instructional mental-workout program; the HOW TO for improving your social marketing; perfecting your personality, body language and image, creating sexual chemistry and attraction; virtually 100s of tips, exercises, and techniques, logically explained step by step.
What I really liked is he explains exactly how and why each facet of your studies works, and assigns you homework. You're forced to do somewhat uncomfortable things until you become a natural through repetition; till each skill is performed effortlessly. Each chapter builds and expands on the previous. After learning all 30 you've got the mindset and confidence to have Game.
Part 2 - The Style Diaries: fascinating to unusual stories from the trenches that focus on the unexpected bad results that occur due to bad decisions in the middle of encounters. It's the HOW NOT TO game women. As always, Neil's infamous story telling of underworld situations are riveting and bizarre, from conquests to hilarious train wrecks. Edge of your seat field reports brilliantly written. He hangs with the who's who of Rock Stars and travels the globe, injecting himself in situations most of us can only dream of. The conquests could be penned in a braggadocio style, but his writing is self-deprecating and fun; he's learning and laughing along with us. A contagious writing style.
Rules of the Game is a very unique concept, and needed to be written. The first title simply left too many men desiring all the PUA tools Style used in the previous title. It's an advanced classroom explaining how he learned to execute all the killer pulls of hot women in the Game. If you're reading this, you've probably already read Mystery's manual. I'd also highly suggest for deeper PUA psychology and a million laughs another bestseller in this genre.
January 17, 2015
All I did was read it, so I realise I have no right to expect it to change my life.
To start of with, I thought maybe I might do these challenges, but the amount of time and confidence you'd need is insane. This is the problem � it's supposed to build your confidence but you need so much in the first place to make these "approaches".
Barely a day goes by when you don't read something that portrays heterosexual men in a negative light as creepy and sex pests. We just cannot win. So, to have the courage to "approach" female strangers really is a massive ask.
It's also the case that you couldn't do these challenges unless you lived in a large, anonymous city. The amount of single, heterosexual women you need to be exposed to would rule out many people straight away, including me.
It's sad that men should need to read a book just to teach them how to stop being hopeless with women, but this is a fact of life. There is the good-looking, confident minority and then there is the shy, six-out-of-ten-or-less, unconfident majority. I learnt my place a long time ago.
To start of with, I thought maybe I might do these challenges, but the amount of time and confidence you'd need is insane. This is the problem � it's supposed to build your confidence but you need so much in the first place to make these "approaches".
Barely a day goes by when you don't read something that portrays heterosexual men in a negative light as creepy and sex pests. We just cannot win. So, to have the courage to "approach" female strangers really is a massive ask.
It's also the case that you couldn't do these challenges unless you lived in a large, anonymous city. The amount of single, heterosexual women you need to be exposed to would rule out many people straight away, including me.
It's sad that men should need to read a book just to teach them how to stop being hopeless with women, but this is a fact of life. There is the good-looking, confident minority and then there is the shy, six-out-of-ten-or-less, unconfident majority. I learnt my place a long time ago.
September 20, 2018
A 30-day training manual to change a dude with no luck in love into a Player. So some days you have to do some silly thing, like talk to some strangers. There were summaries of books such as The Red Queen, with the main focus on why women are attracted to successful men. Very politically incorrect, involving a lot of scripted openings and conversation openers, and playing mind-games with women. But then the book did say that it would make men ‘Players of the Game�. I think it is good to skim through, and some advice are useful (You do need to make your life interesting, and make the first move rather than stay home to play online games); however without due respect for women, I don’t think the relationship would be healthy as the reader is urged to go for next Game once the current one is successful. In reality, as long as men go out to have conversation with women, they would gradually learn how to date. The moment they are getting good at it, they find The One and get happily married and move on to have kids and family.
December 12, 2014
I read this as a self-help book, not just as a treatise on picking up girls. (I'm already married, and before that I never found meeting nice women difficult.)
there are plenty of people who judge their lives by their sexual performance, and they are probably the target for this book. But, meeting girls is a lot like meeting friends, finding a job, buying a car, and winning at poker. So, the lessons of the book can be applied more widely than with the ladies.
I have recommended this to men and to women. again, if you're looking for a book to teach you how to pick up girls, then a book is the wrong place for you to be looking. But if you want to be more confident and self-aware, this is a good place to start.
there are plenty of people who judge their lives by their sexual performance, and they are probably the target for this book. But, meeting girls is a lot like meeting friends, finding a job, buying a car, and winning at poker. So, the lessons of the book can be applied more widely than with the ladies.
I have recommended this to men and to women. again, if you're looking for a book to teach you how to pick up girls, then a book is the wrong place for you to be looking. But if you want to be more confident and self-aware, this is a good place to start.
March 18, 2022
I have the mass market/airport book size.
This is a more a review of the actual book than the author's writing style or whatnot.
If you have poor eyes like me do not buy this. You have been forewarned. The typeset/font size is so small, makes me question what were the publishers thinking, since there is plenty of negative/white space on top and bottom part of every page that should have been utilized to make the letters/font more legible and pleasing to the eye
This is a more a review of the actual book than the author's writing style or whatnot.
If you have poor eyes like me do not buy this. You have been forewarned. The typeset/font size is so small, makes me question what were the publishers thinking, since there is plenty of negative/white space on top and bottom part of every page that should have been utilized to make the letters/font more legible and pleasing to the eye
February 27, 2012
I didn't read much of this one at all. Unlike Strauss's earlier book, this one is a workbook and is hard to read without doing. That's the point, of course, and is no criticism. It just didn't serve my purposes as I didn't intend to do the project, but was just interested in the book after the previous one.
January 25, 2015
I couldn't put this book down as I found myself intrigued by how the author described his exploits attracting, meeting and bedding various women. While I disliked the objectification of women and the behavior of some of the characters, I found it to be an interesting insight into another world and way of behaving that I have very little experience of.
May 8, 2010
Maybe it's me, but what the hell is the point of this book? It reads like part-memoir part-porn with a subtle moral attached in the end. Based on the average rating of this book, perhaps only people who are in the loop will get it. I just don't.
January 20, 2017
Good book to read, funny story and getting to know some of the best PUAs and how the do it.
Some boners along the way :), interesting to see things from a different perspective, well I'm using the best friend test nowadays, a plus to me :)
Some boners along the way :), interesting to see things from a different perspective, well I'm using the best friend test nowadays, a plus to me :)
January 3, 2018
Love, if written in a programming language for robot geeks.
November 2, 2021
Terrible. Terrible terrible book don't read it
October 9, 2024
Il libro si articola in tre sezioni. La prima, la 30 day challenge, è una serie di istruzioni da realizzare in 30 giorni, per riuscire a conquistare delle donne.
La seconda è una serie di script per alcuni tipi di routines: il primo approccio, la dimostrazione di valore, la chiusura, ecc...
La terza sono una decina di storie di avventure sessuali dell'autore.
Per quando avessi trovato godibile il libro "The Game", resoconto del percorso dell'autore nel mondo dei PUA, questo libro non mi è piaciuto. La prima parte è inutile... forse nel mondo pre-applicazioni, gli uomini frustrati che cercavano di portare a letto delle donne, avrebbero trovato valore nelle istruzioni della 30 day challenge. Istruzioni, che tra l'altro trovo talvolta assurde...
Le routine sono imbarazzanti. Stento a credere che possano convincere qualcuno ad andare a letto con chi le realizza. O allora le donne americane hanno pretese molto basse...
Le storie sono la sezione (relativamente) più interessante, ma alcune le ho trovate davvero poco credibili. Il ritratto che ne risulta, è quello di un uomo ossessionato e schiavo del sesso, incapace di costruirsi una vita che lo integri armoniosamente.
Il libro è ricco di stereotipi su uomini e donne, e non vale granché neanche come manuale di seduzione.
Da evitare
La seconda è una serie di script per alcuni tipi di routines: il primo approccio, la dimostrazione di valore, la chiusura, ecc...
La terza sono una decina di storie di avventure sessuali dell'autore.
Per quando avessi trovato godibile il libro "The Game", resoconto del percorso dell'autore nel mondo dei PUA, questo libro non mi è piaciuto. La prima parte è inutile... forse nel mondo pre-applicazioni, gli uomini frustrati che cercavano di portare a letto delle donne, avrebbero trovato valore nelle istruzioni della 30 day challenge. Istruzioni, che tra l'altro trovo talvolta assurde...
Le routine sono imbarazzanti. Stento a credere che possano convincere qualcuno ad andare a letto con chi le realizza. O allora le donne americane hanno pretese molto basse...
Le storie sono la sezione (relativamente) più interessante, ma alcune le ho trovate davvero poco credibili. Il ritratto che ne risulta, è quello di un uomo ossessionato e schiavo del sesso, incapace di costruirsi una vita che lo integri armoniosamente.
Il libro è ricco di stereotipi su uomini e donne, e non vale granché neanche come manuale di seduzione.
Da evitare
November 9, 2023
3.3/5-star rating
Why did I read this book? I’m an unusual person. I don’t drink, smoke, or gamble. I don’t even consume coffee, so it’s hard to relate to the greater population regarding relationships or even just meeting people. I did it for research and morbid curiosity. Research, you may be raising your eyebrows questioningly at me. Yep. I’m an aspiring author trying to get into the psyche of men-specifically the suave dreamy kind.
The 2009 cover called to me with its dark 007 (James Bond) feel. This particular version is outdated (especially, I’m sure, since COVID) but still intriguing. It’s been useful for my purpose and highlights how glad I am to not be in the “market� or “game,� as the author describes.
Pros: Easily digestible steps to work on personal improvement with challenges and resources to assist with your “game.� It showcases masculinity. The U.S. culture can often demasculinize men, and this book counterargues that it is not what women want.
Cons: From a woman’s perspective, the undertone and purpose come across as sleazy. Teaching men to be pick-up artists is lame; we can do better as a society.
Why did I read this book? I’m an unusual person. I don’t drink, smoke, or gamble. I don’t even consume coffee, so it’s hard to relate to the greater population regarding relationships or even just meeting people. I did it for research and morbid curiosity. Research, you may be raising your eyebrows questioningly at me. Yep. I’m an aspiring author trying to get into the psyche of men-specifically the suave dreamy kind.
The 2009 cover called to me with its dark 007 (James Bond) feel. This particular version is outdated (especially, I’m sure, since COVID) but still intriguing. It’s been useful for my purpose and highlights how glad I am to not be in the “market� or “game,� as the author describes.
Pros: Easily digestible steps to work on personal improvement with challenges and resources to assist with your “game.� It showcases masculinity. The U.S. culture can often demasculinize men, and this book counterargues that it is not what women want.
Cons: From a woman’s perspective, the undertone and purpose come across as sleazy. Teaching men to be pick-up artists is lame; we can do better as a society.
August 22, 2019
This book is far from perfect. Too much crack psychology mixed with pseudoscience about why women are different from men. But the book has one great secret: At heart, it's not really about meeting women. It's about salesmanship. I suppose Strauss realized the title "How to Sell Anything to Anyone" wasn't as catchy as "Rules of the Game." But it's true, the book's lessons and challenges focus on making people attracted to you and getting what you want from them. Some lessons are positive, like staying healthy and managing your appearance. Other lessons are negative, about how to identify people's hopes and fears and then bait them. Many tactics are tried and true, but the book could certainly benefit from stronger ethics. In the world of sales, whether a customer regrets their purchase is a minor problem. Whether a person regrets, say, having sex with you, is more serious. While Rules of the Game can help you get a date, you'll have to do a lot more work (and read different books) if you want to keep her.
October 17, 2017
Sievietes ziņkārība. Tā kā jau biju lasījusi "The Game", šīs grāmatas izlasīšana bija tikai loģisks nākamais solis.
Savaldzināšana esot senākā pasaules māksla. Man kā sievietei ir ļoti interesanti uz to visu paraudzīties no vīrieša skata punkta. Pilnīgi pieļauju, ka kādam tā tiešām palīdzētu izmainīt visu dzīvi, kādam uzlabot ierūsējušus paņēmienus. Šis tas nosēdās prātā ar zīmīti "neuzķeries!", šo to noderīgu uzzināju arī sev. Taču kopumā tā ir tikai pašpilnveidošanās grāmata vīriešiem, nevis ļaunuma iemiesojums, kas māca manipulēt ar nabaga sieviešu prātiem, lai tās pēc tam dabūtu gultā. Nu labi, vietām tiešām māca manipulēt, bet vai tad arī sievietēm nav savu triku?
Savaldzināšana esot senākā pasaules māksla. Man kā sievietei ir ļoti interesanti uz to visu paraudzīties no vīrieša skata punkta. Pilnīgi pieļauju, ka kādam tā tiešām palīdzētu izmainīt visu dzīvi, kādam uzlabot ierūsējušus paņēmienus. Šis tas nosēdās prātā ar zīmīti "neuzķeries!", šo to noderīgu uzzināju arī sev. Taču kopumā tā ir tikai pašpilnveidošanās grāmata vīriešiem, nevis ļaunuma iemiesojums, kas māca manipulēt ar nabaga sieviešu prātiem, lai tās pēc tam dabūtu gultā. Nu labi, vietām tiešām māca manipulēt, bet vai tad arī sievietēm nav savu triku?
January 21, 2023
I can't agree with using obsolete mystical activities like horoscopes to start conversations as well as some of the conditional cold-reading techniques. That said, the book will help improve one's life. The lessons aren't just for romance, they pertain to many areas of life such as workplaces or parties: have an interesting life, make people feel good about themselves throughout an interaction, be empathetic. The author is correct in saying just reading the challenges but not actually doing them will not create change in one's life. The last section had very entertaining stories.
March 20, 2020
This book is like a novel that relates how this group of men became the kings of their neighborhood by getting girls to go out and sleep with them. It's entertaining, each character has its personality, problems, dramas... Most of the techniques explained here are not something we'd use to pick up a girl tough.
January 14, 2019
Great for pickup beginners
May 1, 2019
This book is helpful in understanding connection between people
September 26, 2019
Very good book!!
December 28, 2019
Finally finished the book started ten years ago.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 107 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.