Beware the Open-Ended Question: an Opportunity for Anchors!


When strange men are approaching you, be extremely wary of the open-ended question.  The open-ended question is a question that does not have a yes/no answer and requires thought and/or imagination to answer.  The last thing I want to do is to advocate paranoia for my readers, but I very much urge caution and care when someone you’ve just met is asking you questions.

Open-ended questions from a pick-up artist (PUA)  are designed not to get real answers from the woman he’s targeting but to elicit certain states in her, which he can then “anchor” (meaning, to associate them with himself) and recreate at earlier or later times.  Neuro-linguistic programming is where this initially originated.  I will refer you to this link at Wikipedia on anchoring:

 Anchoring can be done in some basic ways:  it can be done kinesthetically (meaning, by touch–frequently, a touch on the arm is the most commonly used), it can be done verbally, with praise (or negativity, if someone wants to be able to set up a negative emotion to conjure up at a later date), and it can be done with sight–such as a dazzling smile at something you’ve said.  

Be aware that you can combine anchoring techniques:  for example, after answering an open-ended question designed to elicit a desired response, the questioner (a PUA or possibly someone else who is using NLP) can touch you on the arm or elsewhere, say, “Great!” and with a dazzling smile.  This is known as “stacking anchors,” and it’s damn effective unless you know **exactly** what you’re dealing with.   Even if you’re aware, sometimes the anchors can be set up without you knowing it.  I refer you to this link where a woman was conditioned into making tea for her husband anytime he wanted it.  Note just how subtle the conditioning can get:

One of the people who came on one of my NLP training courses was particularly taken with the idea of anchoring. Shortly after the NLP training, one morning his wife offered to make him a cup of tea, and as she did so, he gently tapped the side of his cup with his ring. He repeated this the next few times she made him a cup of tea. After a while, all he had to do was tap the side of his cup subtly with his ring & she would spontaneously offer to get him a cup of tea!! Very Naughty use of NLP, Eh?! Just by creating a sensory representation (tapping the cup) that coincided with her making tea, he was soon able to use that representation as a trigger for what he wanted. He did eventually share his NLP anchoring experience with his wife and you can be sure he makes a lot more tea than she does now! [author:  Adam Eason]

This link is from cached websites that Google took a snapshot of:  I recommend looking at them.  If you have a problem in accessing the information, contact me, and I’ll see what I can do.  

The important thing to avoid is allowing yourself to go into states of ecstacy, euphoria, or pleasure when thinking about a new man you’ve just met.  Habitual patterns of emotion or action is *precisely* what you want to look for.  The tea-making was supposedly harmless, and the husband *might* have just wanted to find someone to practice anchoring on, although what he did to his wife was *damn* sexist.  However, there is a way the wife could have cottoned onto what was going on previously to her husband *telling* her how he had anchored her. 

Point 1:  The wife could have stepped back and asked the very important question:  “Why have I picked up this new habit of spontaneously offering him tea?  What’s going on here?”

Point 2:  The wife could have tried to sit down and remember the various times when she was serving tea to her husband–and try to pick out the common thread of what he was doing just previously to her serving the tea.  This could be tough, however…

Point 3:  The wife could have checked out what her internal state was previously to each time she served the tea.  This is an easier and in some ways much more accurate way of gauging what was going on.  She could watch out for compulsory feelings such as the urge to get him some tea.  Urges are particularly easy to look out for.  Watch your impulses; discover what they are and govern them!  This may take a lot of effort…self-control can be a very hard thing to acquire; it’s worth it, however, as it puts you in the driver’s seat of your own life.

Tea-serving is harmless; being manipulated into the sack is a whole different animal.

Note how the husband didn’t even have to ask the wife an open-ended question! 

However, a stranger is at a distinct disadvantage when dealing with you.  There isn’t the huge catalog of positive and negative memories, states, and trust level that our friends and loved ones have to call on and induce.  This makes a huge difference; this situation can be dealt with much more easily. 

Avoid this:   watch for associating feelings of sexuality, ecstacy, euphoria, and behavioral impulses with new men

I don’t care how “different,” “unique,” or “special” they many appear from all the other men you’ve ever met.  In fact, the more “different, unique, special,” or “standing out from the crowd,” a man seems to be, the more of a red flag this actually is.  This is what PUAs strive for, to stand out in a woman’s memory, thoughts, or viewpoint as being separate and different from all the other men she’s ever met.

You do not have a basis for making a real decision for going to bed with a man until you’ve known him for years.   Beware the open-ended question, women.  It has led to one hell of a lot more deception and manipulation than any of us can imagine.

Let’s say you’ve already been bit by the euphoria/ecstasy bug, and you’re uncomfortable with how quickly this has developed.  There is a way to get rid of this, or bring this under control:  more on this the next time I post.



Filed under Uncategorized

9 responses to “Beware the Open-Ended Question: an Opportunity for Anchors!

  1. Adam Eason wrote in, but his comment got caught in the Akismet spam catcher (sometimes knicknamed the “Spamulator,” so I was unaware of it. I have decided to publish his comment, with my own rejoinders. His words are preceded by his name, my moniker starts my replies.

    Adam’s comment:
    What is being failed to be pointed out here as per omitted parts of the full article, is that such techniques are all simply modelling what occurs naturally in a variety of ways anyway.

    Scarrred’s response: That’s why I included the link, so that people could read the entire article, Adam. If I had gone beyond what I did, most likely I would have violated copyright law, which now applies to Internet articles.

    BUT. NLP can and *has* been used in a variety of ways that are highly manipulative. Does that mean NLP is evil? No, it’s *neutral.* But people have a right to understand how it works and to prepare themselves to resist it if they want to. There are many “natural” manipulators in the world who never study a lick of NLP, but people study their methods…I don’t think you can rationalize the ethics of something just simply because it’s modelled “naturally.”

    How many men or women go off making cups of tea when grunted at by their partner anyway?
    How many people respond unconditionally to all manner of different things in every day life that have been conditioned over time?

    This is simply aiming to do it with some conscious involvement and unless someone feels good and comfortable about doing so, they are not going to blindly react accordingly.

    Scarred:: sure–on an *unconscious* level, sure. But when the wife found out *on the conscious level* what her husband was doing, she wasn’t exactly thrilled about it, was she? So, what does that tell you? People resist unnecessary conditioning when they figure it out. No one objects to learning the ABCs at school, for example, even though we’re conditioned beyond belief to learn it. However, it’s necessary. But it’s not necessary to train someone in a semi-Pavlonian fashion to get a cup of tea, is it?

    We do not really have an epidemic of svengali manipulators on our hands that need policing, do we?

    Scarred: learning *how* to resist someone conditioning you by monkeying around with your subconscious mind is NOT policing, it’s self-defense. And “svengali manipulators” is your phrase, not mine…although I’ll agree with the “manipulators” part.

    When someone goes out on a date, they fashion their hair, they dress nicely, they make themselves smell nice, they do all manner of things to alter the perception of themselves in the eye of the other person – now tell me how that is any different from wanting to install a positive anchor with some nice feelings attached to it?

    Scarred: And if someone wanted to strengthen their mind by learning how to become immune to people’s looks and learn how to judge them on their character, how is THAT any different from what I’m suggesting? Our culture admires strong men who don’t allow themselves to be manipulated by beautiful women, or even swayed by them. Why shouldn’t women have the same mental fortifications if they want them? And for *that* matter, why shouldn’t women and men have strengthened mental fortifications against having someone dink around with their unconscious mind so that they can better protect their wallets, their hearts, and other choices?

    If they told a joke and were good company, surely that is conditioning the person to think nice things about them… Why is it that when humans actually realise how to do these things consciously to enhance everyones ability to communicate successfully, people have to attempt to become vigilante warriors protecting us all from it?

    Scarred: My suggestion to you is to sit down and to take a look the phrase you just used. It tells me three things:

    Point 1: That I’m not alone here in blogging against unnecessary NLP manipulation of the subconscious mind. Why? BECAUSE–
    Point 2: “People have to attempt to become vigilante warriors”–this tells me that people get pissed off when they find out about a lot of this stuff–and you’ve heard from them before–PARTICULARLY when it’s used for things that are minor and/or self-serving on the part of the NLP practitioner, and that
    Point 3: You’re threatened.

    I’m anything BUT a vigilante. A vigilante is someone who takes the law into their own hands to avenge a crime or wrongdoing. What I’m doing is forming resistance to the unethical use of NLP on the unconscious minds of potential recipients. I have the RIGHT to do this. If you’ve read other sections of my blog, you’ll know that I’m not against ethical uses of it–such as hostage negotiation and its ORIGINAL usage, which was a therapeutic tool!

    One of the major points of focus of this blog is to help women protect themselves against pick-up artists (PUAs). Some PUAs, such as those who may have trained in the Speed Seduction method by Ross Jeffries, use NLP on women in order to seduce them. NLP is also very frequently used in *marketing* and *advertising.* Sorry, Adam, but people have the right to know what could be used against them and how to counter it. If that offends you, so be it. We live in a highly dishonest and manipulative enough society as it is…and while I think NLP can very much be used for good, there’s one hellof a lot of nasty, unnecessary, and unethical uses of it right now.

  2. Oh, I may guilty of this. I was in a class once where whenever I wanted to be called on (which is often- I’m assertive that way 😉 I would tap my fingers on the desk. It always worked. In my own defense, being a smart girl in a class full of boys makes it difficult to get noticed , but now I feel a bit squicked out about it.

    Scarred Actually, I wouldn’t count this as delibrate manipulation. You were a minor here, and there was an innocence : all you were doing was trying to get attention. That’s not such a big deal. What the husband was trying to do was, I think, deliberate conditioning; he was training his wife to be his *servant*, albeit in a very mild way! I think here that tapping fingers to get attention because you were up against boys is a different animal; boys are expected to be loud and attention-getting, so you had some tough competition. IMHO, as a kid, we’re expected to *get attention* for the teacher to notice us. I don’t think you have anything to feel bad about, because you *have* to participate in class as a kid–more often than not, it counts towards your grade, and the adult teachers *demand* it–at least when I was in school, they did.

    Also, I think we unconsciously condition each other all the time. There are also times when NLP practitioners may have to *consciously* condition other people–such as in therapy or hostage negotiation. (I found out that NLP is sometimes used in hostage negotiation, holy cow!! That was *trippy!*) So it isn’t like conditioning someone is always suspect. Sometimes it’s very necessary. For example, if a bartender finds that every Saturday night, he/she is dealing with the same customer who might like to take a swing on someone after, say, 5 tequilas, and the owner hasn’t given the OK to bar that customer permanently, I can see why the bartender would be justified in the interest of peace and security to try to influence/condition the customer to get out of Dodge after the third drink.

    However, in the case of the husband conditioning the wife to get tea? IMHO, I think that’s forgivable but still pretty skanky, in a real minor-league way. For one thing, he’s a grown man, and he canget his own tea, and for another, it reeks to me of a great deal of sexism–“Here, honey, let me condition you into your proper role.” That’s why I think the wife very justifiably made him get his own tea thereafter! Would it have justified grounds for a divorce? No way, IMHO–but, I think the husband should query himself really well to find out why he thought that was okay to do that to his wife.

    Then again, to play devil’s advocate, quite possibly he may not have had a single shred of sexist motivation but honestly didn’t have anyone else to practice NLP on! It very well could be that he really couldn’t find anyone else on which to practice his skills, and this was the only way he could figure out how to get some NLP practice in! So that can be taken into consideration as well. Tea-serving is reasonably harmless if you leave the patriarchal expectations out of it. But what isn’t harmless is all the conditioning that takes place in the dating scene…

  3. Rocky

    Rocky: I don’t believe I understood what you were trying to communicate. Please clarify.

  4. Ah, but Scarred, after the first couple of finger tapping incidents I recognized exactly how it worked and then did it purposefully and consciously.

    You’re right though, we use little bits of NPL in all sorts of things (hostage negotiation- kinda cool!) but the trick is to know when someone is using it on us and then making a decision as to whether we want to produce the desired behavior.

  5. Scarred the Feminist Pit Bull

    Scarred: YES! That’s EXACTLY what I’m trying to say here!

    And also, I’m interested in putting women–and men, too–in charge of our own psyches. I’ve been using NLP on myself, and I have to admit I’ve been getting excellent results! I’m interested in having the **good,** **ethical** people in charge of our own psyches instead of being schlepped around by manipulators.:)

    Hey, if someone has no problem being NLPed into serving tea, I have no problem with that…I just want someone to be **able** to resist if they want to.

    And wow…even at that age you got delibrate results?? Holy cow, you’re a natural! Ever think about doing NLP?:)

  6. I honestly didn’t even have a definition for NLP until reading your site. But I like to observe people and I am pretty good at figuring out people’s motives (good or bad). Now if I could use NLP on say, all forced pregnancy morons in congress, I’d totally take that as a new career path.

    Scarred: I have to laugh at that last comment, that was funny. Still, the argument has to remain: one must have brains in order to BE manipulated. By definition, morons are MORONS. We have limitations, sis.:)

    All humor aside, though, for arguments of persuasion and conviction I believe in only touching the conscious mind. Unless it’s a necessity, I won’t stoop to the level of a manipulator unless there’s no other genuine choice. Still, I understand…just how tempting it can be. Oh, yes, we all have our Machiavellian side; I have mine, too. BUT. I refuse to use it unless I can’t avoid it. The moral high ground is an absolute necessity to take; it’s what gives arguments against manipulation and control their force.

  7. Ah, yes, I forgot about the morons lack of grey matter. You have seen the “morans” picture haven’t you. (giggles)

    We all like to think that we have the moral high ground. You have to be very, very honest in your own motives and motivations before you go messing with another person’s.

    I’ve gotta run off to brunch or I’d write more.

    Scarred: I agree; extraordinary honesty is hard to do but worth it. My philosophy is this: I grant other people the same freedom as I would have.:)

  8. Andrei

    “You do not have a basis for making a real decision for going to bed with a man until you’ve known him for years. ”

    This is a very strong statement. You have a right to be illogical and change your mind later, to be sure, but, err — by saying this, in my view you’re denying the right for a woman to go ahead and make a real decision for going to bed with a man earlier than after having known him for years.

    People can, and in fact must, own their decisions even when they are made under incomplete information. In fact, nearly all real decisions are made under such circumstances.

  9. Hopefully you give my counter-points some semi-fair attention, hm?

    Scarred: why should I, when you haven’t given any of my ideas any fair attention???

    Tell you what: you’re banned. Your comments will be treated like the spam they are. That’s all the attention they deserve. Waste someone else’s time.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s