(Sample: Do not make a move until you get three IOIs, or Indicators of Interest, such as a slight touch on the arm.) Indeed, the neg itself could be seen as a way to address the problem that sometimes the best way to get a gal’s attention is to ignore her. Kathy Gilsinan: It’s hilarious that this interview got postponed a couple of times. Gilsinan: It’s interesting you say almost regretfully that it became the Bible, because it was marketed that way, right?
If she doesn’t notice you’re ignoring her, then you’re both just standing there not talking to each other. I have a copy that’s on my desk that has [gilt edges], it has a red-ribbon bookmark. It was designed by my publisher at the time like a Bible. Gilsinan: But it’s interesting too, given the way the book ends, with you meeting this woman who is not impressed by any of this stuff, and then you end up with her.
Any way you could do this—and there were lots of bizarre techniques with goofy names, like “peacocking,” where you might wear an outlandish hat to give people something to comment on—helped you get the access you needed to try to convince someone to sleep with you. If anything, Tinder has only facilitated this probability-based approach to courtship, but Strauss’s new book, , is about how he ended up settling down and making peace with the fact that you can’t be monogamous with everyone. But because no one had even heard of this world, and the techniques, let’s face it, are so objectifying and horrifying, that the book became the bible of what it was trying to chronicle in a more neutral way.
So I’m wondering if the guy you meet at the beginning of or was it something else? But it goes through all these different techniques, and focuses on the “Mystery Method” but there’s also like Ross Jeffries, who hypnotizes people, kind of, and it’s weird, and one thing that I don’t think would age well in the Twitter era, there’s one description of a guy whose thing is to just gradually escalate physical contact and his motto is, “let the ho say no.”Strauss: But even then, I was putting that in to show the extremes. Gilsinan: But like, the equivalent today is “Netflix and chill,” right?
Strauss: Obviously in my journalistic life, I’m just a big believer in free speech and art not being censored no matter what it is, and I don’t think a book is responsible for someone’s behavior. For me, it spoke to a wound of mine that already existed before. People already exist and they find their communities. I would hope that at no time is that ever okay in history. But now he wouldn’t be able to get out of bed without rocks being thrown through his window. But I’m wondering, aside from some of the abhorrent techniques that you’ve sort of disavowed, are there any principles you think apply in the Tinder era?
If you talked to me then about it, I would have defended the techniques as a way to learn courtship. I thought I was a nice guy, I really did, you know? And then there was a moment where I told her the story of my childhood. A lot of it is asking questions and treating people like they’re interesting.
If you ask me today about it, I’d tell you that anything that involves manipulation or needing to have a certain outcome is definitely not healthy in any way. And I thought, how can I break the heart of, how could I hurt somebody who loves me and be so selfish? And she said, “Well no wonder you can’t be in a relationship.” And I said, “Why? And you have this realization where you’re like, no wait, that’s my personality.
The second one is, for me, it opened up a door to incredible self-improvement, that I wouldn’t be here, married with a child and my wife, if it wasn’t for which led to this great, joyful fatherhood.