- Joined
- Jan 13, 2022
- Messages
- 40
Currently, I am reading Tim Lawrence’s Love Saves the Day, a book on the disco movement. In the book, Lawrence recounts the story of various New York nightclubs including Studio 54, the most famous New York discotheque.
As a club, Studio cultivated an aura of success and celebrity. In the book, DJs regret the sound at Studio was a bit one dimensional, but that the point of the club was a projection of artifice, to almost be in a waking dream with all these famous people.
The one seduction takeaway I had reading this book was the social proof you would have in this environment would be unreal. Featuring celebrities of the time from Andy Warhol to Brooke Shields, Studio 54 almost certainly had its share of hot models. Studio 54 had a famously rigorous door policy, with owner Steve Rubbell more or less inventing the red velvet rope. The point is any guy would be starting from a position of high social proof talking to women in this environment.
Steve Rubbell, the co-founder of Studio 54, stated in a contemporaneous television interview that Studio was not a “pick-up place” but rather for people who wanted to have a “light-hearted time”. Comments like this though were likely intended to dissuade John Travolta lookalikes from the outer boroughs from trying to get in. According to other accounts, Studio had its fair share of people illicitly fucking, e.g. sex in the toilet was commonplace.
While getting into Studio 54 or its modern equivalent is of course beyond most guys, the relative difficulty of the game is influenced by whether you have a social situation vouching for you. While I have nothing against daygame, I have noticed a trend of guys who are relatively inexperienced with girls wanting to do it exclusively, which is odd as on some level it is the hardest way to meet girls. A more well-rounded approach to game should entail also thinking about environments that play to your advantage rather than merely approaching girls in a social vacuum.
As a club, Studio cultivated an aura of success and celebrity. In the book, DJs regret the sound at Studio was a bit one dimensional, but that the point of the club was a projection of artifice, to almost be in a waking dream with all these famous people.
The one seduction takeaway I had reading this book was the social proof you would have in this environment would be unreal. Featuring celebrities of the time from Andy Warhol to Brooke Shields, Studio 54 almost certainly had its share of hot models. Studio 54 had a famously rigorous door policy, with owner Steve Rubbell more or less inventing the red velvet rope. The point is any guy would be starting from a position of high social proof talking to women in this environment.
Steve Rubbell, the co-founder of Studio 54, stated in a contemporaneous television interview that Studio was not a “pick-up place” but rather for people who wanted to have a “light-hearted time”. Comments like this though were likely intended to dissuade John Travolta lookalikes from the outer boroughs from trying to get in. According to other accounts, Studio had its fair share of people illicitly fucking, e.g. sex in the toilet was commonplace.
While getting into Studio 54 or its modern equivalent is of course beyond most guys, the relative difficulty of the game is influenced by whether you have a social situation vouching for you. While I have nothing against daygame, I have noticed a trend of guys who are relatively inexperienced with girls wanting to do it exclusively, which is odd as on some level it is the hardest way to meet girls. A more well-rounded approach to game should entail also thinking about environments that play to your advantage rather than merely approaching girls in a social vacuum.
