Interesting. I do certainly see RSD's methods as an exercise in function highlighting. Are there many others who document their PUA journey like this? Maybe we could start a topic on it, to look at it closer.
Definitely! PUA culture takes a lot from general self-help culture, and "gurus" tend to consider it a good marketing strategy to talk about how they used to be basically ordinary (or less than) until they started applying certain techniques to become who they are today. Online, there are also forums full of people who've written reports about their attempts to apply these ideas in practice, and I'm sure there would be plenty of useful material there. I remember there being a notable confessional element to the culture, not just in the sense that people were rewarded for talking about successes, but that posting reports (good bad and ugly) and tracking progress was seen as character building and virtuous, and that's not likely to have changed over the years. That's likely to be a rich source of info.
That would be most helpful indeed. I feel like we sometimes run up against that edge where CT theory currently ends, and so the sample can't be made sense of just using CT. And other things like Enneagram/Personality Disorders (or just the rest of psychology in general) are absent in the analysis, but should be used more proactively to inform on the person in question. Having watched a lot of Jordan B. Peterson lately, I realize just how many other psychic dimensions there are to measure here.
It'll be interesting to see how this theory correlates with Big 5, especially since Big 5 has pretty significant correlations with MBTI and is pretty much the gold standard personality measurement in psychology. I'm really curious to see how different expression patterns also tie into other personality and psychological systems, as I think there's probably a lot of rich information to be had there if we can demonstrate that it's at least partially subject to conscious control.
Anyhow, I bring this up because Tyler seems to be fully feeding into that archetypal male narrative, which involves "Leading" women, seeing women as wanting to be lead, and being "dominant" and "confident". It may be more correct to attribute these traits to the masculine archetype rather than to Fe. I think I may have to differentiate my personal concept of Fe a bit here, and not conflate it with these other elements.
I actually find that there's this interesting androgyny present in the seduction community; on the one hand, there's a huge focus on developing traditionally masculine traits and behaviors in social interaction, but on the other hand, there's a kind of dandyish, metrosexual element focusing a lot on personal style, achieving emotional balance, and emphasizing verbal and intellectual strength over purely physical prowess (though, the verbal and rational are usually also considered archetypally male, so this might not be femininity so much as a non-physical manifestation of masculinity). If you look at some of the older pictures from the 90s and early 2000s, you see this kind of weird obsession with flamboyancy, and a lot of those guys look pretty much the opposite of macho.