Diminishing returns to “learning more game”

There are diminishing returns to “learning more game” or “improving your game.” Average or below-average guys who begin learning game (they improve themselves and their value-delivery mechanism) see rapid improvements. As average guys move away from being average and spend more time with women, they lose their ridiculous views about women and learn that women are people too and have their own set of reproductive, social, and sexual challenges. Women make many mistakes in the dating game, but low-level guys are blind to many of the mistakes, and to many of the feelings women feel.

Once you learn the models, you maximize your own value, you sort out your psychology, you do the things you need to do, you start seeing the results… you will probably run out of room to grow. Male-female polarity is very old. The game is very old. The growth of feminism and changes in birth control have, however, led men to need to discover, or re-discover, game in each generation. Optimal game today is not precisely what optimal game was in 2000 or 1980 or 1948… social media and phones have layered some nuances that didn’t exist then. But the fundamentals remain.

I don’t think there is NOTHING left to discover. There are new ideas left. The big ideas in game, around body, fitness, health, style, male-female polarity, eye-contact, accepting rejection, gentle teasing, escalation, push-pull, hot-cold, demonstrating higher value… I get them. I don’t implement them perfectly and have many f**k ups of my own. New guys need to master them of course.

There are aspects to my game that could be improved. My cold approach is actually not that good. Usually I rely on something observational, which is not always the best way to go. But, like I said, it has been “good enough.” In the last ten years, it’s been pretty rare for me to feel desperate.

This is also why I think I will end up not writing much more here. There are aspects of the game I can improve… but they are not that big and I don’t care much about them. When the skill has been mastered, execution becomes more important than study.

It’s been a while since I’ve been truly surprised by something a woman said or did. Unfortunately, I also have persistent, annoying injuries that prevent me from doing all that I’d like to do in the gym. That shows up in body terms. I’m still above-average, far above-average for my age, but not where I was or could be.

The male analogy: young guys blowing their military cash

There’s a male analogy to the sex workers mentioned in What the thinking escort is thinking… young guys who enlist in the military and then blow their cash. I’m chatting with a guy via email and he brought up the documentary Girls Do Porn… it’s a sad film, for lots of reasons… the number of women suited to doing sex work is not that high, and porn is not a good idea today because the market flooded years ago… seriously, practically every porn ever made is online, on streaming sites or in torrent sites… so doing porn for money is stupid. Reddit’s full of unpaid peer-to-peer amateur porn. The market is glutted… gotta move on. The opportunities that existed for “porn stars” to make money existed from about 1970 – 2009… that window is now closed, but the high-end escort market still exists.

The guy I’m chatting with mentioned that in the documentary, most of the girls work for a couple months or a year, get paid a lot of money by teenage standards… and spend it all. One girl, however, has a boyfriend the whole time, saves her money, goes home after she’s done working, and has a bunch of investment cash at the end of her time. She avoids the purses, clothes, and whatever else young dumb girls spend their money on.

The situation reminds me of guys in the military… you’ve probably known them… to a typical 18 year old 20 – 30k and low expenses seems like all the money in the world, so it’s easy to throw that money around. Disciplined guys get out in 4 – 6 years and have 50k+ saved up… chow is covered, housing is covered in some/many circumstances. Outside every big base, though, are a bunch of car dealerships… you’ve signed the enlistment papers… that’ll get you a high-interest loan so you can get the fancy vehicle… then you have to spend money on gas, parking, transporting the vehicle, insurance. The girl from high school is tired of working her minimum wage job, so she’s suddenly interested in getting married… she’s so pretty and willing… and she’ll be loyal to you while you’re overseas… of course she will, baby… a lot of guys can get out with nothing, sometimes less than nothing. Smart guys save that cash and use their educational allotments wisely when they get out.

This equivalence is not exact, obviously, so don’t stretch it too far… an attractive woman can make a million dollars with relatively low time commitments from age 20 – 30… living in a big city is far more fun than living on bases… military guys are very unlikely to make a million, even half that, and military guys have hugely more downside… just ask the guys who spent most of their time in third-world holes… but that similarity remains, lots of people who get cash early blow it. For most people, lifestyle expands to the amount of money you’re making… I’ve been guilty of this too in some ways.

The whole American edifice is built on debt… I admire people like Mr Money Mustache, who questions the whole debt/consumption treadmill. The things that really matter in life are 1. who you’re connected to and 2. what you’re making/creating. Most big-ticket spends (housing, cars, fancy clothes, pricey restaurants) don’t really improve either… they may be net negatives for both. I like game for many reasons, but one is that game helps improve connections and is also a form of making/creating (connections in this case, more than something tangible). It’s also relatively cheap… it costs some money for drinks/coffee, some money for simple meals, some money for a gym… compared to what most people spend on the big ticket items, it’s low cost. Freedom is the best thing you can buy, and you buy freedom by not spending money, particularly stupid money… most chicks don’t care what car you drive, as long as it’s clean and runs. For a lot of chicks, riding a fun electric vespa-type scooter / bike is a more fun and interesting date than spending a lot of $$$$. Ask what really matters and focus on that…

What the thinking escort is thinking

From a funny tweet, “I’m not doing onlyfans because I need to I’m doing it because I’m slutty and I like money.” It got me thinking, past what I’ve written before… there’s probably some truth to that woman’s rationale… the good/psychologically sound strippers/escorts I know, or have known, get in the business because they like f**king a lot anyway and often like doing it with strangers. They’re like, “I could make a million bucks doing this part time, and I’m already doing it anyway.” Clients are usually older than the average guy they’d hook up with on their own, but some aren’t, and some are pretty decent in bed. A sex worker is really an amateur psychologist who also f**ks… her job is to figure out what the client really wants (often not what he says at first) and deliver it. A lot of regular consultants do this too, but bring a different skillset to the table.

I have probably met more girls who are sex positive and highly sexed, and mentally unblocked about it, than the average man has, because those girls often find their way into the sex-positive community and into sex clubs and sex club culture (sometimes clients bring them as dates). For a lot of these girls, they want to f**k a lot anyway, aren’t very interested in monogamy, are open to experience, and like sex adventures. If a woman likes those things anyway… she might as well get paid for them… like a guy who likes programming computers on his own time will also discover a robust market, and be pleased that he can get paid for stuff he’s doing anyway.

These chicks aren’t super common, and for the most part they aren’t completely flaunting who they are. Very few chicks, even sex positive ones, will announce they’re into sex work, or that sex work turns them on.

They can do math…. let’s take a woman who works as as sex worker from age 20 – 30 and she is hot and decently good at business. She charges say $500/hour and $2000/night in a big city. She works one night a week, and for the sake of simplicity we’re going to count each month as consisting of 28 days, so she gets a few extra nights off. She gets two one-hour sessions and two overnights a month, on average, so that’s $1,000 and $4,000 a month, or $5,000/month, or $60,000/year. Times ten years, that’s $600,000. She might also pick up some tips and some fringe benefits, but she also has to pay for fancy lingerie/clothes/etc. Some costs involved. She’s not quite made a million dollars in the four times/month scenario but if she’s enterprising and willing to work a bit more, she can get to that million pre-tax dollars.

Few normal men want to date sex workers (I bet you would never have believed that…). There’s some sex-worker talk out there about how sex work isn’t real sex and doesn’t count… we can safely discount that hamstering because of course to most normal men it “counts.” If she’s out f**king for money, then to balance the reciprocity equation, he needs to have his piece of the open relationship… and sex clubs are a way of achieving that. So sex workers who are highly sexed to begin with, will often also seek guys who are already versed in open relationships.

The majority of sex workers probably come from stereotypical f**ked up families, desperation, poverty, etc., and they realize that sex worker is more lucrative than other kinds of work, but it takes an emotional and spiritual toll that leads a lot of women to drugs, if they’re not starting from there. All professions have a culture associated with them and sex work, like music or anesthesiology, has a drug culture associated with it. So there’s a lot to be said for the messed-up stereotype, but I don’t think the sex work makes the woman messed up so much as she arrives at it already messed up.

Mostly I’ve been describing the psychology of the mentally healthier sex workers… the less mentally healthy ones are really dark, and often not very bright… bright women realize that sex work is a time-limited activity… and it’s hard to do well… scamming men is especially dangerous.

Obviously this is not very relevant right now, since I bet sex work is pretty dead, because of the risk and the unemployment rate (among clients). In a bad economy, hiring sex workers is one of the first things to go… and other girls flood the market simultaneously, although I’m not sure that’s happening right now. But… what’s happening cannot go on forever, so it won’t. I don’t think it can even go on a year.

Guys have to be pretty determined to want to hire an escort. Chicks have to be pretty determined to take the risk. A lot of the kinds of chicks in their 20s who would form the bulk of the industry are living with family right now, if they can. The ones who aren’t, aren’t paying their bills, cause evictions have been halted in a lot of places. But we’re going to have to re-start the economy sometime… within two years we should have a vaccine… some fundamentals will remain.

Things Red Pill and pickup get right about men and women

A guy asked me about what I think is true and useful in red pill, since I’ve written out some criticisms… it’s a good question… I thought about it… and came up with some answers…

1. Women (mostly) get their value; men (mostly) earn their value

An attractive woman who doesn’t eat too much sugar and isn’t ridiculously lazy gets a lot of social and sexual value as a teenager, and that value stays with her well into her 30s (where it can drop suddenly… a lot of women are surprised by the drop). She doesn’t have to do much to get and maintain her value. Men, by contrast, mostly have to earn our value through achievement. “Achievement” can mean a lot of different things.

“Mostly” is key because there are exceptions. Women can squander their value, and some get screwed genetically, and some get screwed behaviorally by their families (if your family feeds you a bunch of garbage simple carbohydrates and sugar, then a lot of the value will go away or never arrive). Some guys have great physical attractiveness and that works with women, for a long time, without great effort… a few guys get a lot of value without having to do much work for it. There are exceptions but the overall correlation is clear.

2. Most guys don’t understand women.

By failing to understand women or what women want/feel, most guys screw up their game.

3. Women are attracted to winners.

What “winners” means can mean a lot of different things to different women… but a guy who wins at something is going to do better than a guy who doesn’t.

4. Family courts in the United States are set up to attack men

Family courts take men’s money and children away, and there is very little a man can do to stop that process. Real world divorce should be required reading for any man contemplating marriage.

5. Schools are biased against men

Same as #4, but with schools. Parents need to resist schools’s desire to medicate boys, especially younger boys. I don’t want to spend too much time b**ching about bias… the solution to bias is to work harder than the other guy… but it is real and exists.

6. Men are performance oriented.

Video games are poisonous because they give the simulacrum of performance with none of the outcome from the real thing (as a side hobby they can be okay… for a lot of guys they are not a side hobby). “Performance” can mean lots of things, so this is similar to #3.

In terms of men and women “performance” is usually measured by, “are you f**king the chick?” If you f**k her… that is an unambiguous performance success measure… because it’s unambiguous… a lot of guys prefer softer, squishier metrics.

7. Game works. Pickup works.

The game and pickup practices work, if a guy is willing to put in the effort and practice. “Works” will vary by guy… a guy who is male 4 is still unlikely to get female 7s… but the tools are available for a guy to improve his sex and social life, relative to where he starts, if he wants to… most guys don’t, not really.

8. Chicks are usually more passive, and guys need to be more active

Especially with sex/dating, guys need to make the first move… and make things happen… most chicks will accept or reject offers and do little to move things along for themselves. Men create civilization, women live in it (and raise the next generation). Magnum likes to say that women veto. When I was younger I thought women were kind of like defective men because of their inability to propose things, plan, and execute. Now I realize that different isn’t the same as defective… if you expect a cow to be a dog you will usually be disappointed.

9. If you work, you will get better.

This is not a strictly red pill idea, but red pill guys emphasize growth and growth mindset over static/fixed mindset. Trying hard and practice matter. We influence our own destinies, and the harder we try, the more we influence. “Influence” is not the same thing as “100% control…” we are all somewhat restricted by the circumstances of birth, family, genetics, etc. But within those parameters, the people who work to seize control, get more control. If you believe you will fail… you are probably right… if you believe you can’t change… you are probably right…

10. On average, differences between men and women exist

This is pretty straightforward… you can overemphasize differences (a lot of red pill/pickup guys do) but you can also underemphasize them (media is super guilty of this).

Red pill dad has a summary of “basic red pill things.” I think the distinction in #4 is rarely clean cut… and I think #9 is mostly untrue… but the others I mostly buy.

I’m sure I’m missing things… but there is little game happening during the pandemic, so we get more speculation and fewer field reports… I have speculated that the pandemic will change the game… probably by making chicks more k selected, and less r, on average. When we have a lot of money, low disease burden, and extra resources, we can afford to f**k around a lot more. Cross-subsidies in relationships don’t matter as much. Can the woman not cook, but she’s good in bed? That’s okay, order takeout. Can the man not earn, but he’s hot and a practiced dom? That’s okay, she’ll get a job of her own. When we see incomes collapse and uncertainty rise… we’ll see more k. The opposite, more r. That’s my guess… it could be wrong… and it also only takes a few outliers for a “trend” to feel wrong, even if it is overall correct.

Couple-to-couple dating mechanics, and keeping a texting roster for sex clubs

(Adapted from the book.)

Most guys are familiar with one-on-one dating, and models for players doing one-on-one dating are widely available. The skills learned in one-on-one dating apply to two-on-two dating. Simple ones include avoiding politics; searching for common ground; understanding hopes, dreams, and aspirations; listening more than speaking (if possible); having stories to share (if possible); etc. All the stuff from How to Win Friends and Influence People, as well as many other books. It’s also helpful to gauge the experience level of the other couple, cause if they’re highly experienced, it’s easy to accelerate towards sex. If they’ve never done a “full swap” (the men have sex with each other’s woman), go more slowly, take more time, and let them ramp up towards it.

There are two critical parts to two-on-two dating: your girl has to be devoted to being on the same team as you are. In addition, she has to be willing to help you succeed with another couple.

Lots of couples with a bi girl in the mix will hunt for a single girl. Single, attractive girls are called “unicorns” for a reason. They can be found, but demand far outstrips supply.

Some of the guys who read here are learning the non-monogamy ropes; most of this is in the book, but I thought I’d excerpt it here for whoever is curious. The person whose Twitter DM inspires it, knows who he is.

Couple-to-couple dating usually happens when contact details are swapped at a party, or when a couple finds each other online (it’s also useful to watch for a guy who tries to get your girl’s contact info: if he does, just tell him that you handle dates). If you’ve met at a party, regular phone numbers or email addresses are typically used. As of this writing, most people online seem to have Kik accounts; people like Kik accounts because they’re relatively anonymous, though I’m sure that the company could be subpoenaed for information about the person behind the pseudonym.

Couples from parties are, in me experience, more reliable and less likely to flake, but some will. First dates are not unlike regular first dates, except harder to coordinate, because they require the schedules of four people to mesh, not just two people. They’re also more likely to end in sex, if everything goes well.

If your girl is aligned with you, it’s useful to evaluate the other couple, even if they already meet your looks threshold. For example, if the guy is a blowhard, or doesn’t show reciprocity, or is disrespectful of you, your girl, or his girl, it’s time to leave. In normal dates, it’s somewhat common to fight through some amount of female bad behavior, much of which may just be a shit test, but if you see bad or indifferent behavior, it’s time to bail. Some girls will come out on dates at the behest of their primary partner, but if she seems bored or uninterested, it’s time to run: she will probably not want actual sex.

Some guys will also pretend to have a girl, then show up to a couples date alone, saying that his girl is out of town. When that happens, leave, obviously.

Remember the fundamental rule of sex clubs: value-for-value. Guys only bring value if they bring a hot chick with them. In normal, 1:1 dating, “value-for-value” is a little bit different, as the guy is assessing the chick’s physical attractiveness and sanity, while the chick is also assessing the guy’s physical attractiveness and sanity, but she’s also assessing a lot more about his social world, his emotional world, his dominance/prestige, etc. Guys who attempt to “give” too much value in the form of paying for expensive dinners, giving gifts prematurely, etc. are actually demonstrating lower value. With 2:2 dating, the value proposition is about two guys bringing two hot chicks to the situation.

There are a fair number of “pic hunters” or “pic collectors” online, and for that reason I’m reluctant to send nudes in advance, in most cases. Sometimes, if the vibe is good, I will, but I minimize that by saying that we prefer to meet each other in person.

It’s good to think of yourself as a guest in someone else’s relationship, and for them to think of themselves as a guest in your relationship. If they don’t conduct themselves appropriately, it’s time to end the interaction. Interaction problems are especially common among new couples who have no social script to follow, and in new couples it’s common for one person to be more excited about non-monogamy than the other person, leading to conflict. That conflict may be submerged at first but will emerge the closer the evening gets to sex. At clubs, I have seen guys start crying the first time they see their partners have sex with someone else, and I’ve seen the same from women. Most people don’t know how they’re going to react, which is why doing this while married or cohabitating is so dangerous for novices.
If this seems over-explained, imagine trying to explain conventional dating, in full, both the subtext and context, to someone who’s never done it before. The basic idea seems simple, but the complexities are sufficient to fill numerous books (most bad, like The Rules) and be the subject of endless gossip. I’m trying to prepare guys for most eventualities.

I spent some time doing two-on-two dating, but I make minimal effort in that domain. If I’m on the market, I’ll typically give one or two apps or websites a look once a week. Today, Feeld is probably the most common app, followed by OKCupid. SwingLifeStyle.com used to be the most common site, but its dated feel dissuades most couples in their 20s. I’ve heard people discuss SDC.com. By the time you read this, some other apps or websites may be common; the dating world changes fast enough that what’s true today may not be true tomorrow.

It’s typically bad form for opposite-sex individuals to contact one another directly. That is, it’s common for guys to talk to each other to make arrangements, for groups of all four people to talk, and for girls to talk to each other, but when a guy contacts the other couple, it’s typically for surreptitious one-on-one sex. Players know that, usually, the most difficult time moving a girl to sex is the first time. After the first time, the guy doesn’t “count” as a new guy, so the girl is much more pliant. Even guys who can’t articulate the situation like this are aware of it, so after a couple-to-couple swap, a fair number of guys will try to arrange sex. That’s where your girl should tell you, “Hey, Joe just texted me to meet up one-on-one.” Then you can either tell Joe to f**k off, or you can ask his girl if they’re also dating separately.

This is a game theory problem. In a two-couple, four-person situation, there are strong reasons to defect, for the sake of the sexual novelty. But a hot chick brings automatic value to the situation, so it’s usually bad practice and bad game to let her go sleep with another guy, one-on-one, with no reciprocity.

Finally, a word on flaking. With a typical, one-on-one date, there are only two possible flaking parties. With a two-on-two date, that number increases to four. Beyond that math, many more people are attracted to the idea of consensual non-monogamy than are ready to execute the idea. In many couples, one party will be far more into it than the other, so the one party will get online, create a profile, start chatting, set up dates, etc., only to have the other party veto the whole thing at the last minute.

In addition, some couples like the idea of consensually f**king other people in theory, but when the moment of turning theory into practice arrives, they no longer like it so much. Flaking and ghosting online typically care no consequences, so people are more willing to engage in bad behavior. Expect a lot of flaking in this domain.

When a couple flakes, I’ll sometimes shoot them an email about the next sex club I’m going to and when I’ll be there. They can show up, or not. This might sound like a waste of time to players used to the normal dating world, but sometimes a couple I’ve interacted with online will show up four or six months later and be down for a great swap. The cost to me is low: I have a list of potential couples on email, kik, and text; I send them all the notice a week or two before the event or club night; and then if they show up, great, and if not, I’m not out much. If the girl is ugly or my girl doesn’t like the guy, we can be polite, say hi, and then fade into the background or move on to other couples. For some couples, the email or text saying, we’re going to the ____ Adult Club, is sufficient to get them off their asses. Others never show, and that’s life. Online life is flakier than real life.

There’s one club in particular where I’m somewhat known (and popular) for bringing in newbies, because I’ll use the above strategy. Couples can debate among themselves whether they want to show up or not. If they cancel two hours before the date, which is sadly common, my girl and I don’t care.

It’s not worth taking flaking seriously: assume you’ll see more flaking rather than less. I don’t spend a lot of time chit-chatting online. After two or three exchanges, I propose a time and place to meet. If they can do it, great. If not, I move on, and I’ll keep them around for party invites. Enough quality chicks and couples have shown up after six months of invites for me to keep up the practice.

Prolific online dating selects for delusional chicks

Here is a specific example of the kind of statement I see frequently and I’m sure you have too, if you hang out in pickup and men’s Internet:

Part of the problem is that American chicks are just super fucking flighty, stupid, and picky: selection bias means the chicks on Tinder or online dating in general here, as going to be more flaky, stupid, and picky than chicks who have their shit together.

Two of the most interesting girls I’ve met in the last four years or so, Short Dancer and Ms. Slav, both say they’ve never done online dating. Never. Zero times. No Tinder. They meet men (and women, for Ms. Slav) in real life, at parties, etc. They could be lying, sure, but I don’t know why they would. Both of them have reasonable expectations of men, in my opinion, and they’re both hot. Not hard 9, Playboy bunny hot, but very few guys would be unhappy with either. Some of the most delusional girls I know, however, have done online dating… a lot of it. Just talking to girls and noticing the ones who complain about online/not being able to get a boyfriend, versus the ones who have reasonable expectations and try to like guys in real life (as opposed to defaulting to NOT liking them and disqualifying them)… there is a big difference between the two. I suspect I also have unusual experience among guys writing about the game online because I know and have met a lot of girls, so I get to hear them talk, think, and cogitate. That means I get to hear some delusional thinking, sure, yes… but their words and actions, parsed correctly, do yield insight, over time, and aggregated.

Reasonable girls know… there are tons of decent guys out there. Guys who are employed and have normal bodies/personalities. If a girl is not f**king nuts, she won’t be online for long. She’ll meet a guy who is okay… and she’ll start dating him. Maybe he won’t be a male 9 and spit tight entertaining game… but if she is able to look past some initial fumbling, she gets a boyfriend. If not… she is online, a LOT. Girls who reject every guy who starts with “Hey” or “how are you?”, are going to select for guys who are clever players. Girls who reject every guy who isn’t at least 1 and ideally 2 points above them in terms of sexual market value (SMV), are going to spend a lot of time online dating, cause their market isn’t clearing. They will get a lot of sex from higher status guys… who will then drop them… leading them to complain about men… while never looking at their own behavior.

By contrast… I’m thinking of this girl I’ve known for a while, Jane, who was like a 6…. and did online dating for like 5+ years (not sure what she’s up to these days cause I lost interest)… yet despite being a 6, Jane had the personality of a bitchy 8.5+. She was online constantly, with her f**ked up psychology, going through guys and complaining about guys. Her friends were similar. All of them stated that they wanted boyfriends but somehow none of them could quite hang onto them. They were all young, and some adopted the modern feminist man-hating ethos, which further hurts their ability to get boyfriends. You can’t date a person whose whole class you have taught yourself to hate (men with an underlying hatred of women also do poorly… a lot of older women with declining SMV become bitte towards men as a class, which is a reason they’re often dangerous to date). Jane and her friends are the kinds of girls Red Pill guys complain about.

The Short Dancers and Ms. Slavs of the world… RP guys don’t complain about (well, they might complain about Ms. Slav’s love of sex and uninterest in monogamy, but that’s another story…). The Short Dancers of the world are probably invisible to most Red Pill guys.

The Market for Lemons is a famous paper describing how online dating markets have evolved. In my experience, in the 2009 – 15 period, online was weird/unusual/thin enough that a lot of chicks on it either had niche tastes or really needed to meet new guys, cause they weren’t offline. Now the online markets are much thicker but normal chicks want to get out of them quickly…. and they do. They maybe spend a few weeks on Tinder. They are not idiots, so they go out on dates pretty quickly and evaluate the guy in person. They know there are lots of decent guys out there. They pick one and get offline. If he is image matched to them, the relationship goes well.

Example: last time I checked, Short Dancer seemed to be dating a male 6, for some reason. No idea why… could be that she wants monogamy real bad and is willing to compromise to get it. She’s at least a high 7 and I’d give her a solid 8. But if she is serious about monogamy, she is likely getting it, and the guy is probably stunned to be getting a girl as hot as her. I think there are more girls like Short Dancer out there than we give credit for… but they are almost all in relationships, if they want to be. If “Katie,” the girl I wrote about a few days ago, were young and in the market today, I bet she would do no or minimal online dating.

It’s easy to sort girls who are really interested in meeting a guy, because they want to meet pretty quickly, even for a 45-minute coffee. The flakey ones want to have long, drawn-out, and pointless online conversations with guys (you can guess who stays on the market).

I have also heard daygame guys say that, if they do a lot of daygame, and then do online, they will sometimes run into girls they daygamed online. And those are much more productive matches.

With this particular girl–let’s call her Double Take–we text a bit on Tinder and then I ask for her number, which she gives. I set up the date for the next day, she agrees, game on.

While we’re texting that day, however, it comes out that I’ve day gamed her! She rejected me, of course, because chicks are rational lol.

I honestly didn’t remember, but she insists I tried to get her number sometime before and that was why she swiped on me.

Obviously daygame is not relevant during coronavirus, but at some point coronavirus will pass or we will get treatments for it, and the game will remain.

Smart guys, today, are figuring out how to get offline to meet chicks, or combine offline/online in a smart way. Even back when online worked fairly well for me, I always did some combination of online and offline. I have also been interested in photography for a long time, and that has helped. Even if you are a good-looking guy, if your photos don’t show it, you will fail. There is serious data showing this. Shirtless bathroom selfies don’t cut it. I have pics of me where I probably look like a male 5 and pics where I might look like a male 9. Maybe that’s an exaggeration, but ones that look great. None of the best-looking ones were taken by a cell phone, either, I want to emphasize. The camera is useless if you’re not doing anything interesting, but doing a lot of interesting things and not having visual evidence of it is not useful for online dating. Maybe that sounds like a lot of work, but there is no way around doing the work for a non-elite guy. Girls complaining about online usually have not done the work, internally or externally.