Is Seduction Real?

From a SoSuave regular:

This has been driving me crazy for awhile so I got to post this question. Can you REALLY, honestly, seduce a girl? When I say “seduce” her I’m talking about taking a girl that just wants nothing to do with you at all for whatever reason that you might have no control over, and literally saying this or saying that and changing her mind?

Here’s what I’ve experienced:

1.) My “presentation” is mostly the same with every girl and really there’s no presentation at all. I’m about all personality. Most girls that I meet say that I’m “cute” (you know how girls talk) in the looks area, I always present myself wearing high fashion and my car is nice.

2.) But here’s the thing, the results I get depend upon the girl. There are girls that will love me, some that will just “go with the flow,” then some that will flat out say boy get lost. But here’s the WEIRD thing. I would have some average looking chick reject me to turn around and have a total dime accept my offers lol. Looking at it, it doesn’t make any sense, but I think it’s coming back to what I’m starting to see in the field and that’s the result of the interaction with the girl has more to do with the GIRL in question rather than you. I mean of course you need to work your Game, look good and do your thing, but what I’m finding is that the results often depend upon the state of the girl and her life and her background, etc.

I mean are guys here seriously whipping out “lines” and player shit to turn girls that are just totally not interested to being interested? I guess from reading the manosphere I’m more in line with the focus on the girl being interested when I show up rather than believing I can create interest.

Are you really seducing the girl or did the girl find you sexy when you walked in the door and already decided that she would fuck you JUST AS LONG as you didn’t come off as a loser, creep, etc?? Which means all this shyt comes down to is having the balls to go up and spark interesting convos, have an interesting personality, and knowing WHICH girl in the room to go up to and which ones not to?

There’s a PUA idiom that states 80% of seduction is simply not fucking up what’s already there. Attraction is not a choice – however, what you do from there is entirely up to you.

I think people get hung up on the word “seduction.” It conjures up melodramatic associations of doing something nefarious to tempt someone into doing something against their own interests. In some instances that may be the case, but far more often seduction is really just selling yourself effectively by manipulating the emotions and psychologies of others. Politicians, religious leaders, salesmen, etc. are all seducers of varying shades. There’s a very blurry line between influence and seduction, but in both cases there’s a willing participant always present. No seduction, or call-to-action was ever consummated with a person who wasn’t already somewhat desirous of being seduced.

Advertisers have known this for years; the best seductions are the ones where the target isn’t aware of being seduced, plays a willing part in their own seduction and are so rapt in their own involvement that they’ll prefer pathological denial when confronted with having been seduced. To varying degrees, people have an innate, limbic level ego-preservation mechanism that protects them from the damages that humiliation might injure them with. No one likes to think that they could be so inured or naive (i.e. suckered) that they’d fall for a seduction, yet whenever they buy a lottery ticket their heads are filled with fantasies of what they’ll do with all that money.

So, given all of that, naturally no one is going to ever get any concrete, totally verifiable feedback as to what produced an effective seduction from the target that was seduced. That’s the subjective nature of all seduction – you can only draw your conclusions from what worked and what didn’t according to your own observations of your own goals, not the target’s.

For instance, I’d argue that it’s a rare woman who’ll admit to having been seduced by a man. It’s a point of pride for women to think that they have some preternatural ability (feminine wiles) to seduce men (really by virtue of having a vagina). And for those women who would admit to having been seduced, it’s always couched in a sense of complimenting herself for being a woman of such value who could attract a man capable of seducing her.

Bear in mind, everyone has Game. Even the worst beta AFC in the world believes his supplication, pedestalization and outright prostration for a woman will separate him from the rest of the herd of “other guys” and increase his appeal to her. Everyone of us, learned or not, has a Game in that we approach our sexual interests in the way we believe will best produce the desired result – sexual response. The average chump wouldn’t think to call it “seduction”, but his ‘Game’ that’s evolved, misguided as it may be, is still an effort in influence and persuasion over a girl to get to sexual response.

Learning from Failure

In terms of learning seduction, failure is more beneficial than success, and this is exactly what guys fear because failure comes in the form of rejection, or in the case of the already committed chump, a fear of rejection. The young AFC will rely on a deductive reasoning (as most males do) which plots something like this:

I have a physical need for sex -> Women have the sex I need -> I must find out what women require for their sexuality -> I ask women what prerequisites they require for this exchange -> I must model my personality, behavior and ambitions to best exemplify these prerequisites -> I must perform these behaviors for her approval -> I get sex.

This is simple male logic and ultimately self-destructive because the women he petitions find it easier to require the dictates of social contrivances that they feel should be expected of him (and modified by their own set of contrivances) than to actually give him the honest truth which would likely set him on his ass in rejection, but moreover would help him better learn how to genuinely develop his own identity.

It’s this failure that teaches most accurately. On several occasions I’ve advised guys to be more wary of their successes than thier failures. Men meticulously pore over and analyze the minute details of why a date went sour or why a woman cheated on or LJBFed them, but the moment they F-Close for the first time, the minute they taste that sweet successs they’ve been aching for so long to achieve, the story changes to “OK Rollo, thanks for all of your help, I can take it from here.” I can think of at least 4 recovering chumps I’ve personally counseled that aped the behavior well enough to get their “ONE” dream girl then crashed and burned in exactly the way I warned them they would because they never paused to question why they succeeded.

The goal of their ambition was more important than the process of understanding how they came to achieve it.

When I was counseling, the single most common complaint I heard from older AFCs was how they got a “raw deal” for doing everything that was expected from them. They did, to the letter, everything that they thought women expected of them. They were “good guys”, they played by the rules (women had set for them), they weren’t ‘Players’, they paid their bills, they were “Supportive®”, sacrificed their own ambitions to benefit their wives and children, they fed the dog and took out the garbage; but these guys were miserable because the fear of rejection, the “I’d lose her for sure if I rock the boat” scarcity mentality was more powerful than recognizing a deficit in appreciation from their wives for the life-sacrifices they made in order to keep the peace and ensure a steady supply of mediocre sexual exchange.

However, for all of their complaints and commiserations they never stopped to look at the process of events that brought them to their condition. The ‘success’ of having found a woman who’d marry them was all that was important to them at the time. Much of that “don’t question it” mentality was due to them having a Scarcity Mentality, but as their relationships decayed the focus became more about repairing it and themselves rather than untangling the process of events that contributed to it. The car was running, the TV came on when they hit the power button, and that’s all that mattered – it’s only when the car breaks down and the TV wont come on that they finally get to the nuts and bolts.

Romantic seduction has never been one-size-fits-all. In fact this is expressly spelled out in the introduction of the Art of Seduction by Robert Greene (required reading for Rational Readers). A lot of men forget what the ‘A’ means in PUA – artist. You can’t just blindly expect one style of seduction to work for all types of women – that’s why it’s called an Art. Being a good artist of any sort requires time, discipline, an ability to improvise, creation, adaptation, attention to detail, etc. There are certain basic foundational principles women adhere to (hypergamy being the most universal) either due to social convention or biology, but the good seductive artist uses these as a basis for an individual seduction. For instance, the seduction of a church mouse and a goth chick require two separate seductive approaches, but they’ll both be influenced by the underlying influences common to all women (i.e. hypergamy, dominance, etc.). A Man’s Alpha prowess will appeal to those biological foundations, but his approach in seduction needs to be measured by the conditions presented by his target.


29 responses to “Is Seduction Real?

  • Morpheus II

    I think one of the most important things in this post to is that no one approach fits all women and to remember the foundations of biological influences of hypergamy and dominance. I think a lot of people get are still just looking for techniques and are not working on internalizing any qualities needed to increase the chances of seduction of their target(s).

  • Socialkenny

    Dude on Sosuave had some solid questions.

    Judging from the real meaning of “to seduce”,it’s basically to mislead,lead one astray.

    Following that true meaning,I as a PUA most times have to try to mislead women into sleeping with me.

    Not only PUA’s do this,but naturals and natural players also.

    But the underlying theme playing here is that the target knows what’s up.She is just as much in control of the seduction process as the man.In fact,she’s probably 75% in charge of what goes down.Meaning,she wants to fuck but has to put up that front because of social protocol.

    As far as girls who aren’t interested from the get-go,this is a tough one to judge.There are girls whom I’d banged who apparently weren’t into me at the inception.So in essence,I changed their minds or seduce them(mislead them).

    Or is It that they were really into me from the get-go,but pretended like they weren’t?

    So this is a tough one to pin down.

  • nexus

    Totally agree. If you click with a girl, I would argue that ‘seduction’ isn’t even strictly necessary. You just need to avoid making mistakes that would cause the girl’s ‘alarm bells’ to ring and this comes from experience. The more experience the girl has, the more alarm bells she will have developed, but also the more likely she is to be looking for long term compatibility, in the knowledge that her sexual value is declining.

    If I don’t feel a strong attraction to a girl, I don’t bother spending too much time on her, because chances are she’ll sense the lack of attraction and ultimately that I’m just trying to fuck her to justify the amount of time spent thus far and that its unlikely to develop into anything beyond average sex. Girls are often happy to draw things out and waste your time when they realise this, perhaps for the ego boost they get from an attractive male giving their time and attention, or maybe just to return the insult of ‘being used’.

    A girl I spent time with the other day kept making excuses why we shouldn’t go back to my place, but I could sense that she was just trying to draw things out as long as she could and unlikely to change her stance. I wasn’t that attracted to her, she was hot and sex would have been fun but I knew it wasn’t going to happen – I could just sense it, so I decided to cut my losses. And I felt better for having done that rather than wasting more time with her. I didn’t burn bridges, but wasn’t willing to play the game by her rules, which probably earned me some respect if nothing else.

    That’s why hotter girls are often easier to get hold of. We find them very attractive and they sense it, and this provides the conditions for passionate sex and the potential for longer term relations.

  • Team-Red

    “Take time to deliberate, but when the time for action has arrived, stop thinking and go in.” ~Napoleon Bonaparte

    Recognize if a woman is interested, then take the necessary actions to get her into your bed. Your plans must be precise, without delay, and committed. Waste little time by doing what society has taught you to do in letting her get to know you. The longer you hesitate, the more likely that attraction evaporates. I wasted so much time and money over the years thinking I needed to entertain women before sleeping with them. Now I make them entertain me and put my interests first. Be the general.

  • Cyrus

    still, why do I Seem to be able to get with some extremely hot girls, high in value, but still crash and burn with some less appealings 6s an 7s?

    I’ve always considered 7s harder to game than 8s and 9s, haven’t really approached a dime yet. Is it really game though? Maybe it’s because it’s 8:45AM but you kind of lost me on this one ere Rollo, am quite confused

  • Cream

    A by-product of evolution has been the fact that while men’s tastes for women are more or less standardized, women’s tastes for men are all over the place. That helps weed out losers and gives chances for children to acquire potential new beneficial traits to be selected by evolution. The human race is benefited by this approach.

    A consequence of this is that you may fit the blueprint of a specific woman much better than another woman’s. (Irrespective of the looks of these women). Some women are programmed to like you more, for your traits appeal more to her, perhaps even pheromones, immune system etc…

    In the end pick up is a numbers game, As you get better you can turn around some girls who are on the fence, but every once in a while a girl will be so into you naturally that all you have to do is say hi. And others will not even give you the time.

    And this happens with really hot girls too. Some will love you, some will hate you. Just swing more and you’ll get the home run.

  • Socialkenny

    @Nexus-Seems like you’re denying seduction being real.

    No matter how much you click with a girl,as the guy,you still have to run seduction game.

    Naturals or guys who know nothing of seduction still run a format to getting laid.

    So don’t think that because the chic is digging you,you can feel free to go Beta and not seduce her.

    To beat LMR takes tactics,technique,routine,etc.No matter how much a target is feeling you,some form of LMR is almost inevitable,which requires game/seduction skills in the seduction phase to get the notch.

  • Cyrus

    This makes a lot of sense.

    In the end, is that all game is to you? Making a sell on a potential buyer who is on the fence? Some would disagree on that note. Personally, I agree.

    The hottest girl I ever dated – solid 9.5 was during my more “AFC” days although I had seen the truth behind the matrix before. I didn’t have game, yet she fell head over heels for me. 3 years later I’m 22, bigger, strong, more attractive, more confident. Game has improved vastly, but I’m still not seeing any other 9s, that’s for sure.

    What I believe it is is exposure. Back in those days I was modeling and was merely exposed to hotties. To that extent it really is a numbers game.

    Now I have started a career in finance, I don’t get exposed to such women. It’s not a “game” or lack of game, I just never see girls above an 8. The only girls at my uni who are 8+ are dating soon-to-be-pro athletes. IIt doesn’t really matter that I know how to talk to women when I never see them. Sure, I might go to the mall and catch a few looks, but I only feel comfortable day gaming when the girl doesn’t have a destination or goal at the forefront of her brain. Ie, I’m in an elevator with her, game on. She’s headed to the Victoria secret, no dice.

  • nexus

    Haha yeah I suppose its become natural to me now! All I’m saying is that my methods seem to be more effective on girls that I’m genuinely interested in, rather than girls I just want to fuck for the hell of it.

    I was a ‘natural’ to begin with but used to use alcohol to support my game and frequency in the field (i.e. going to clubs all the time). When my tolerance for alcohol and therefore my social circle died is when I found out about the community.

    Even before I knew about ‘game’ I still had some. For instance choosing cosy bars with low lighting and sofas to take girls on dates too (a clear tactic).

    I am all too familiar with LMR though and am often good at breaking through it, but girls can easily get freaked out when the pressure is on and you’re ‘moving too quickly’.

    I think by ‘is seduction real?’ Rollo is asking if it is more up to the girl if she is going to sleep with you, rather than you somehow winning her over when the chips are stacked against you.

    But clearly there are techniques and things that you must do in order to get her in the sack.

  • The Shocker

    PUH – pick up hobbyist

  • Socialkenny

    @Nexus-Well I knew Rollo’s point.

    As I said in my 1st.comment;it’s hard to judge.

    At the end of the day,the woman makes the decision to give up the vagina or not.But she won’t give it to to a guy who lacks skills.So it all depends.

    As far as genuity;you’re right.If I solely try picking up a girl just because I wanna bang her,or just because she’s available;I will crash and burn lol!I’ve notice that for years now in my game.But when I’m genuinely into the HB,my chances of laying her is sky high.

  • Almacantar

    FFY had a good post about this the other day:

    http://flyfreshandyoung.wordpress.com/2012/07/11/good-looking-dude-game-the-tactical-compliment/

    In general, people that are in gray areas between one defined category and another (in this case the spectrum from cute to hot) tend to have more anxiety about their place and therefore require some form of positive acknowledgement to assuage their egos, particularly if they perceive the other person in the interaction to be higher status than they are. Imagine someone like Johnny Depp trying to pick up a 5; the 5, if she was aware of her own value, would probably be more than a bit skeptical about his motivations and intentions. If something seems to good to be true, it probably is and all…

    It’s the same thing you see in high school and college; those on the cusp of popularity are often the most sensitive and the most likely to be aggressive toward others to protect/elevate their own status.

  • Hero

    One of the mistakes made in thinking about this is assuming that women are, by default, not interested. I think the opposite is true. Women are very social creatures and are interested in communication and connections.

    As we know, they are also very practiced at disqualification and are quick to do so but that is only after realizing that they are not interested.

    One of the more powerful things I read said something like “women are just waiting for something interesting to happen to break them out of the boredom of their day”.

    I think by default they are open and hoping that they will be interested in you but quick to judge and disqualify.

  • BlackCat

    I think there is “seduction” that is just a catch-all term for trying to make oneself attractive to the opposite sex, and “seduction as manipulation” which includes things like hard NLP, outright lying with intent to deceive, and advanced sales techniques using applied psychological principles that have been shown to effectively alter choices made by unaware targets. Note that even manipulative seduction does not work all or even most of the time, and much still depends on the choice of the seducee, but it still might be considered the “dark side”.

  • Marellus

    Rollo.

    First, thanks for a great post.

    Now you mentioned Robert Greene’s book in your post, and I am busy reading it now. From that book, I have one question :

    How do you deal with a Coquette ?

    What works against a Coquette ?

    Thanks for any help.

  • gregg

    We men, should be pursuing clarity, truth and freedom. Attraction is a very serious matter – it directly sets the structure of future humans – children. This thing has to deal with imune system, DNA, the well being of future generation. First question for us is – what is the quality of my genes? We have to answer this one honestly.

    Other question is – what can I do with those genes? What is my league? And the fundamental question is – can we succeed in seducing someone to whom we are NOT attractive? You know, there is no “chemistry”, you are not smeling well to her, etc. Can we change her mind using seduction?

    From the evolutional point of view this one should not be possible – there is a risk of bad organization and incompatibility of immune systems, of the possible offspring. But, I have to admit that I have a couple of experiences when I bedded women which have not been that into me from the start, but all those experiences happened in a close, structured and somehow forced enviroment – work, college, party. We were forced to see each other on a regular basis and she has been given a chance to grow some kind of attraction based on my behaviour and status. But I have never succeeded in bedding any women that have not been into me right from the start -there was not “spark” if we have only limited mutual encounters.

    So – this may be the message for our unattractive buddies and friends. Yes there are unattractive males, coping with great disadvantage when it comes to “game”. They are unattractive for many women, instead just for the few. Attraction is not a choice – remember. So they have no bait right at the start. Judging according to my experiences with women which have not been into me from the start, guys, maybe there is a slim chance for you to change women state, if you let her grow attracton slowly in some structured enviroment. Good status and behavior game, goods seduction expected.

    But, if you are unattractive I would be very careful with direct approach and limited room for encounters. It is up to you how many rejections you could take. Anyway I feel deeply for you fellas, you are warriors that have it very hard. Do not give up. Faced with such a disadvantage and not giving up is manliness to its core. Something I deeply and honestly admire.

  • The One Reason

    I think by default they are open and hoping that they will be interested in you but quick to judge and disqualify.

    I guess I’m with Roosh here (as per “Day Bang”) that women know pretty much right away whether they have any sexual interest in the man; especially if the scenario is a daytime one, with her usually more wary mindset. (And this leads to a general pet peeve in ‘sphere comment threads: many times having read an action description/breakdown only to realize that it was specifically about a night game scenario, whereas I by default think in day game terms.)

    As for having openness to otherwise be swept away even temporarily by a confident and “entertaining” approach may be another matter altogether – and that way perhaps she will be later more open to sex. I can give this much for roissian school of “looks don’t matter (that much)”.

    But otherwise, I have always had a similar feel as the OP in the post. It does depend very much whether the girl in question is for any of many reasons – of course largely built around appearances – already interested/intrigued. I guess this issue goes along tangentially with the recent negs/disqs posts at Roissy’s in the sense that there has to be a modicum of interest built for certain types of (non-pre-emptive) negs to work. As my MO has for decades been more along the neggingly aloof (“reservedly abusive”) or mischievous lines rather than other contemporaries’ more supplicating (“engaging”) style, this has indeed worked on those that had already interest or were otherwise more in awe as per my status or knowledge.

    So, when I got a chance introduction to the dark traits four years ago, through a now-defunct, local non-US site, succintly called “Player’s Handbook” (if translated, of course) – undoubtedly being largely the Gospel according to the Mystery school, with hatty paraphernalia reduced – it stated some of those things I’d used as being some sort of f-ing cutting edge tools. WTF? But the constant willingness to engage with the girls and have interest to endure the hours of conversation to convert those on the fence is indeed something that I personally have to improve upon. Some of those moments of ironclad (daytime) IOIs from pretty and stylish, heh, yuppie girls* and me passing because I’m not “in a state” and other buffers… Duh.

    ———-
    As for Kenny’s dilemma about shifting allegiances, I guess that the same forces are at work here as with Justin Wayne when he has had women even say to him that they would not have normally given him the time of day, let alone sex. But by showing with attraction and comfort-building that the personality can trump any sterotype or preset notion of sexual interest, the deal is sealed. Or the interest indeed can be repressedly latent just below the surface…

    (* I never realized how hot a blonde with a fashionable all-white winter clothing, sitting with long white boots deliberately and meaningfully crossed, can be. *Kicks himself*)

  • colonelcrimson

    Love the registered trademark logo after “Supportive.” Made my morning.

    Now, off to go use my artistry on some church mice. I will keep this advice in mind.

  • YaReally

    1) The PUA community used to focus a lot on trying to figure out how to turn around any situation no matter how impossible it seemed. Whether it was a cold initial reception, active hatred by the girl, a flakey number, a girl who landed a BF, married women etc etc. This benefitted the knowledge-base a LOT. It’s because of trying to plow through or smoothly recover from these situations that we broke through a lot of limiting beliefs society has about attraction. We know now that a girl rejecting you can simply be a shit-test she secretly hopes you pass, married/taken girls can be seduced easily, flakes can be turned around, you can sleep with friends/sisters of girls you’ve already hooked up with, insta-dates leading to sex are possible, daytime seduction/sex is possible, etc etc.

    These days, especially in the manosphere/MRA mentality but also in a lot of the PUA community, there’s a very strong notion of “if she doesn’t get on board…NEXT!!!” and we cut our losses fast and move on and don’t waste your time and play more of a numbers game. The old mentality was basically “you can’t Next a girl you haven’t slept with, that’s her Next’ing YOU.”

    While the knowledge we gained from pushing these impossible situations was amazing, and you really COULD pretty consistently turn a lot of situs around, ultimately it meant that a lot of guys were investing a lot of time and energy into seducing girls they didn’t really have much chemistry with. It was more for the notch on the belt, the thrill of the hunt, the joy of solving a puzzle and sharing the solution with other PUAs on this new frontier.

    Now while today’s attitude isn’t as good for breaking new ground, it results in a lot healthier and more natural relationships where guys find girls they actually click with and have chemistry with earlier on. I think that’s a good thing in the long run because most guys aren’t looking to master the seduction skillset for any type of woman, they’re looking for a quality girlfriend or a small harem of cool chicks they enjoy having in their life…especially in the manosphere (PUA schools tend to still be more focused on racking up lays in general).

    That said, while I’m glad the mental shift has been made to generally healthier relationships, back in the day there was a very real and pretty justified belief that a good PUA could seduce pretty much any woman if he had the chance to work his game on her. The old “5 for 5″ thing wasn’t totally a joke. Our conversion rates back then were a lot higher than guys these days. Our game was a lot more flexible too, we could completely change personalities and tactics based on the type of girl we were dealing with…vs today where we focus more on “be yourself and self-amuse and find girls who like who you really are” which again is more healthy in the longrun.

    2) I’ve slept with a number of women for whom I’m not their type at ALL. Like girls who’s dating history is the complete opposite of me and who find themselves actually frustratingly puzzled at why they wanted to sleep with me. Girls that if I wasn’t running game and was just standing in the room, would never have taken a 2nd glance at me. Whether its height, status, money, race, fashion style, etc. I’ve been just completely not what they’re normally attracted to. Hell some of them were hate fucks because they hated that they were attracted to me, and some wouldn’t even admit we knew eachother in public because I didn’t fit in their social circle or in their friend’s judgement of the type of guy she’d be with lol

    Again none of that is super healthy in terms of forging a relationship (tho it can be done, it’s just a lot more effort). But in answering the question of whether a girl who’s cold or uninterested or actively dislikes you can be seduced, I would say yes. The more important question is simply: is it worth the effort? What “prize” do you really get out of it? Why is it important to you to get this specific girl’s validation? etc.

  • Morpheus II

    YaReally’s post just shed some light on somethings I’ve been thinking about. Props to you man

  • AlphaWhiskey

    Agree with all that man. Game will help but ultimately there is a social hierarchy, much of which I believe is dictated by genes (seems like researchers are corroborating this more and more). It’s just the bitch of Evolution. It’s good to be near the top though…MuhahaHAHAHAHA

    Also, your last paragraph reminded me of the guy in the comments here who made 3000 approaches and banged 9 girls. I shared your respect when he posted that:

    https://rationalmale.wordpress.com/2012/05/23/perceptions/

  • AlphaWhiskey

    Super solid.

  • Linkage Is Good For You – 7-15-12 | Society of Amateur Gentlemen

    [...] The Rational Male – The Adolescent Social Skill Set, Denial, Is Seduction Real [...]

  • Linkage Is Good For You – 7-15-12 | Society of Amateur Gentlemen

    [...] The Rational Male – The Adolescent Social Skill Set, Denial, Is Seduction Real [...]

  • Dean

    First off I am going to say that when I first read about “taking the red pill” I thought it was all bullsh!t. I thought here are some guys who have been hurt and are now woman haters and bashers. Then a few days later as i was walking around I could see the examples of “Beta Males” and AFC (myself included). At my job,hearing my friends complain about their women/wives/GFs, in the stores, the gym; wherever.
    Then I went back and read and clicked on posts like the “G Manifesto”, “The Lifestyle” and even that Big Game blog one.
    So I I set up some dates and listened to how women talk and a lot of it paralleled what all these blogs were saying. Yes! The red pill tasted bitter alright!It went down like those old school multi-vitamin capsules. Hard to swallow and went down slow but gave me all what i needed.
    The next thing thing was to apply all what i have learned. The “16 rules” perfect..
    So I was on a date last night and the girl says that she will know within a few minutes if she will bang you or not. After I smashed it of course. So to chime in on is men have seduction, do we? Yes! Its our charm, taking control and leading like men should do. Thats what gets their panties wet.
    Once again thanks for all the great insight! It feels great to be unplugged let me tell you…

  • krauserpua

    I try to filter girls into Yes / No / Maybe as soon as possible. Yes girls are about leading and not fucking up, No girls are to be screened out as soon as possible. All the skill of game is in Maybe.

  • The One Reason

    Myself:
    But the constant willingness to engage with the girls and have interest to endure the hours of conversation to convert those on the fence is indeed something that I personally have to improve upon.

    To elaborate on this, a case in point: I’ve now started a holiday in Sunny Scotland and on departure, on the airport bus to the plane, I hit a very bodilicious girl (think young Jennifer Hawkins) standing next to me (I was sitting) with a neg about her wearing shades when it was raining outside. We had a short give-and-take as she immediately went along, clearly piqued by my approach (and probably sharp attire) and the sudden possibility to joke around. But after just a short exchange I chickened out as I panicked with mind blanking, and turned to watch out of the window to save my worthless ass. That of course killed the momentum and it was all over in a blink with DHV diving to DLV. Or hopefully she thought it was intentionally cool and teasing… Sure.

    The worst thing was that in my panic I actually totally missed that she not only was fully aboard my banter but actually gave me material herself by talking about needing the shades “right now”. I understood when it was already too late that I could have replied with telling her not to drink so much that she needs shades the next morning and continued there. Test. Failed. Ego investment in a no-re-engagement rule I guess.

    Indeed, if a girl has interest in you, is open enough in character and wants you to succeed in talking to her, she will give you material to continue gingling her. Which of course leads closer to a seduction. Hell, her hamster carries those yummy pellets itself to the PUA.

    There would have been little possibility for a # close with us being almost at he plane and her uglier friend (who stood farther away in the bus, disapproving) rejoining her on the plane stairs, but Game is about enjoying the Ladies in any way possible.

    Which brings me to wondering whether it’s a totally chode-ian mindset which I have about jumping off prematurely; I immediately have this feeling that I’ve somehow “betrayed” her by raising her interest (giving the early ‘gina tingles) and then chickening out and leaving her dry, literally. Of not being a man and carrying the interaction even though it would leave me totally failing as I bomb in front of her, instead of exiting safely as the first snag rears its head. Of course I’m the one initiating the approach and thus having the “right” to end it – and girls wouldn’t hesitate to drop me from a convo if I wasn’t what they wanted. But still.

    I don’t myself think that I’m pedestalizing too much because I truly love girls who can take a flirt in a sporty, not too attention-whorish way and think on their feet cleverly when engaged. For me, after all the point, basis and truth of Game comes from loving girls (to a point, as for ex. Rollo’s excellent “Pet” post attests), in a non-ONEitis way. In this respect I’m with London’s Yad as he gave his philosophy on the matter in the Saturday Sarge video series.

    I’ve a somewhat Krauserian approach [edit: didn't know that K himself commented above as I wrote this offline] to electronic game (encompassing text/email/FB/IM) in tone, OK, a lot less sexual, heh, but I’ve indeed called the email since the mid-1990s “the IQ test” which gave me a good sense of the level of humour and suitability of a girl. And the time lag allowing me to utilize my strengths. The best of those being the other half of a couple for whom I designed their new house, and even though I only threw in light innuendos, I guess she got some thrill from our semi-illicit, all-over-the-place, not exactly professional messaging.

    This was almost as long as a King A post. OK, a couple of hours to get sleep, then to the far ends of Highland. And a whisky distillery.

  • Djeed

    I do not understand. If you really have a mindset of abundance… What the hell do you care? You go for everything with the right attitude, sexual but not giving a shit about rejection. You go for the yes, for the noes, for the maybes, take the ones that want you and keep being sexual with the rest. Isn’t that what it’s all about, desiring women?

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,645 other followers

%d bloggers like this: