November 27, 2011 at 4:55 pm If an unskilled native American started to train archery and hunting with his more adept fellows, wouldn’t he improve? Wouldn’t he grow in confidence in his ability to nurture a family? Wouldn’t he then become more attractive to the women of his tribe? PUA techniques are shortcuts. It means to act as if you had high-status and resources, to behave as men who do possess them — simply put, to deceive. After all, a woman in a night club cannot instantly know your actual social rank nor see the inside of your wallet. How does she choose then? By your behaviour, by how you carry yourself amongst other men. Height, symmetry, broad shoulders and muscular build do matter, but a genetically unfavoured man who holds authority over his better-built folks still gets more attention from potential mates, by demonstrating social power, “ambition and industriousness”, as Buss might put it. He may be cheated on later for better genes anyway, as studied by Gangestad and Haselton. “Also, Buss’ cross-cultural study was concerned with long-term partner slection and it relied on self-report. Studies of short-term mate selection that are based on observation (rather than self-report) find that women look for (a) good looks; and (b) wealth and that they are willing to trade off one for the other.” You ignored the link you provided. Here again: https://codimd.caa-ins.org/s/B1lVUWWhll https://md.renjikai.com/s/_QgCY6gDG https://pad.eisfunke.com/s/Q6s27Y4WW https://notes.simeonreusch.com/s/3QYvE-csQ https://pad.leinelab.org/s/1MjlcHTlI https://pad.wdz.de/s/iU_xOECsk https://zapiski.nejckrasevec.si/s/WiDnktMpS https://md.gafert.org/s/WKPGI4ZGt https://doc.sonoj.org/s/na9IlaEEU https://docs.localcharts.org/s/YXhkG2ha7