I don't like Mystery Method, and I don't like Magic Bullets (Love Systems) structure to game. I think by having a phase where your goal is to generate female to male attraction, you are automatically assuming that you need to demonstrate how attractive you are, and that in itself sub-communicates that you are of lower value. I know some will argue that girls have no idea who you are when you walk up to them, and that is reason enough to generate attraction, but I disagree. I think by walking up to them, you have already shown that you have balls. I think by assuming you deserve to talk to her demonstrates that you are someone who is self-assured. Of course, your body language and you vocal skills need to be congruent with what gets assumed, and that I think is the core essence of attraction.
How much attraction do you need? I think enough for her to let you keep conversing with her is all you need. I don't think attraction gets you laid. I think that enough for her to want to keep conversing with you, combined with your ability to lead an interaction towards sex or a relationship is what ultimately gets you what you want.
I've been told by my friends/wings that I don't do enough attraction material. They're right, but I am also trying to build myself up to be a person that doesn't need it. I do lose a lot of sets right off the bat because I go direct, and I don't have an elaborate routine stack ready to go. I also feel that there's enough hot girls that are cool with me walking up to them and hitting on them that it doesn't matter.
Like I said in an earlier post, I have this inner game issue where I am not used to having a lot of women in my life, and therefore I don't have a screening mentality. Because of that, I tend to talk a lot, and do a lot of bantering. I find that having routines ready to go (yes, I do have some routines, but not necessarily a stack) helps me to get through a conversation, however, I also get stuck talking at the girl, instead of conversing with her, finding out if I actually like her beyond her looks.
I was browsing some pickup blogs and I came across the following article. I like the internal reframes he listed on there, and I'm going to try to actively do these when I am interacting with girls.
http://www.kissntale.com/2008/12/31/thinking-the-natural-way/
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
I think by having a phase where your goal is to generate female to male attraction, you are automatically assuming that you need to demonstrate how attractive you are, and that in itself sub-communicates that you are of lower value. I know some will argue that girls have no idea who you are when you walk up to them, and that is reason enough to generate attraction, but I disagree. I think by walking up to them, you have already shown that you have balls.
So you do need to demonstrate how attractive you are, by walking up to them.
How much attraction do you need? I think enough for her to let you keep conversing with her is all you need.
So why don't you stick to opinion openers?
I've been told by my friends/wings that I don't do enough attraction material. They're right, but I am also trying to build myself up to be a person that doesn't need it. I do lose a lot of sets right off the bat because I go direct, and I don't have an elaborate routine stack ready to go.
I was under the impression that you lose a lot of sets because you ejected.
I find that having routines ready to go (yes, I do have some routines, but not necessarily a stack) helps me to get through a conversation, however, I also get stuck talking at the girl, instead of conversing with her, finding out if I actually like her beyond her looks.
I think good routines have hooks that generate interest in the girl and causes her to talk to you. For example, I use smart/hot/rich. Sure, I talk a lot during that, but most girls aren't smart, hot, and rich. I ask them for their best quality, and they tell me. We can then discuss that quality, or whatever we want.
I was referring to actively generating attraction. The walking up to them can actually be reframed as you finding out about her, and the action by itself should demonstrate enough attractive qualities to get things going.
Opinion openers, at least for me, is an excuse to start a conversation with a girl. When I used them, I would literally tell myself "I'll just go and ask her this question, how bad can it be that I want a simple opinion". I feel even if I don't have that mentality, it's highly incongruent with who I am.
I do lose a lot because I eject a lot. Although a routine stack would help me, I am not a fan of deploying a stack of attraction generating type routines.
I am not down on routines, I am down on the "attraction phase" of Mystery Method and Love Systems. I have an issue with assuming that these routines need to be deployed to generate attraction.
Still, one should be aware of the social value in different environments. A guy doing cold approaches during the day has higher value because most people don't do any approaching during the day. If you do, you've definitely got balls.
At bars and clubs, 1) people are expected to approach, and 2) most who approach are drunk so they are automatically thought of as losers. So guys are generally assumed to have lower value in bars and clubs.
You make a compelling argument. I think my inner game issues are forcing a conflict. I want to think that it is okay to assume I have to generate attraction, but I also want to believe I am an attractive guy who can show it passively. I've been in situations where would do attraction type material, but over did it and it just became weird. I think the original post is more where I want to get to - being able to rely on my presence for attraction.
I think you have a lot of valid points in this article, and in fact I agree with it. A while ago I figured out that the very act of doing a "DHV" - by DEMONSTRATING higher value - actually implies that you're not truly high value. Especially if the DHV is false or made-up.
And I can't count how many girls I've lost due to excessive hard game like cocky funny or active disinterest...
I want to think that it is okay to assume I have to generate attraction, but I also want to believe I am an attractive guy who can show it passively.
If you are the most attractive guy in the world and no one sees it, are you really attractive?
What you seem to be saying is, "I like myself, so girls should like me too." You're protecting your ego: by not running attraction material, you give yourself the excuse that the girl rejected you because she was blind for not realizing how attractive you are.
So you do a half-assed approach: you demonstrate some value through looks and balls but then stop short of the goal.
I'm gonna have to disagree with Joker here.
When you are attractive, you don't have to ACTIVELY show value.
Your lifestyle, the way you carry yourself do most of the grunt work. By the way you casually share stories about yourself, by the way you relate and talk about yourself... or generally talk about your life shows that you are an attractive person.
You don't need special DHVs to show you are attractive when you already are attractive.
You only need DHVs if you know that deep inside, you have nothing to offer... but the reality is... everyone has something to offer. You just have to realize it and convey it in some fashion.... but not over do it with DHVs.
Most people overdo DHVs and it comes across as ingenuine or... as bragging.
Listening, relating to her is actually most of the time easier to do that over talking or over-DHVing.
Let's put it this way... have you ever thought great about yourself because someone took an active interest in your life?
Because they showed genuine care, genuine enthusiasm in you, you feel like you really like this person?
Well... that's what most people don't realize... attraction is a lot simpler than what PUAs make it out to be.
Post a Comment