I discussed the phenomenon of Game once before, and physics prof Steve Hsu just referenced it in relation to an HBO series written and directed by a woman who seems to believe in it (trailer at the link). The most-famous application is the supposed ability of PUA's to hack the primitive hardware installed into females to get them into bed. (My take: it apparently works on some of them.)
I certainly get why this would be the most fascinating aspect, to both men and women. But I wondered in my post what the applications were for political figures and other leaders. What does it mean in other types of attention-getting, such as wearing red, or performing arts? There certainly is ample evidence that primitive programs influence our responses at least somewhat. What are the limits of that? what are our defenses? One fascinating report of the women who have encountered "Game" and fallen for it is the split between those who rationalise their behavior later and those who say "I can't believe I did that. I don't deserve to be treated like that and I can't imagine why I put up with it."
Today I connected it to something I noticed years ago: women - not all women, but many - confide in their hairdressers more than one might think if viewed objectively. It may be related to a similar, unconscious "hacking" of more primitive responses. Who do you allow to touch your face and hair ordinarily? Your mother, your sister, your husband - a pretty intimate group. Perhaps the mere allowing of a person in that close sets off a level of relaxation and trust.