I don’t tell other guys what to do. Personality traits and dating

I don’t tell other guys what to do, unless they ask (or unless, in a business setting, I’m paying them)… even if they do ask, I aim to set up the problem space and the principles involved, then let them decide for themselves. There’s some divergence between me and other other guys on topics (example), and that’s fine…. read me, read them, decide for yourself. The basic principles of game and seduction are well established and if you want to ignore them, do it. I’m writing about my experiences and observations… maybe they’ll work for you… maybe not… I have said to guys privately, “Assume everything I write is bullshit and try it out for yourself.” What I do isn’t for everyone… we all have different preferences, life experiences, big five personality traits, etc. What is right for me may not be right for you, or for other guys. I’m just talking about what I’ve found… and how I’ve organized it and what some of the underlying principles are, or seem to be. I also don’t have the energy for online combat… it’s largely pointless… if other guys want to do other things, good, go do them… that is fine. Experience teaches best.

I will argue that most guys don’t understand what is possible, for the right guy, and most guys don’t know s**t about women. The stories are about what’s possible. We’re social learners and I don’t think most guys get how deep the rabbit hole goes.

In terms of five-factor personality, I am pretty open to experience, as regular readers will understand. My conscientious is strongly bifurcated… I am super conscientious in many respects, but also very easy going and careless in others… this could be unusual. I’m not sure. Extraversion is similar… I need to time to recharge from social experiences but I am also capable of managing social experiences, like all players must be. I can be agreeable in some ways, especially in social circumstances, but I have also read How To Win Friends and Influence People, and head-on disagreement rarely solves or improves anything. To change a person’s view, come at the views via indirect angles that slowly change foundations over time. Direct disagreeability is usually counterproductive. Status/coolness first, THEN evangelize for whatever the thing is. I’m low neuroticism… no surprise there… many women are highly neurotic, and I calm them down well.

“The cat years”

Another super sad spinster story. “The cat years” is depressing… looking at the dark side of life is important… for women, not having a family sets them up for a life that is composed more of misery and missed opportunities than for joy… yet younger women are systematically misled. I have some compassion and pity for spinsters… they messed up and they are an example to other women of what not to do.

Write your player blog. It’s an advertisement, but not in the way you think.

The best and most actionable advice and guidance for guys looking to build their game and become players is private… it’s happening in group chats, emails, etc. It’s not happening public, where some advice is good, some is bad, and a lot is too general. The public sphere has a lot of good and useful information in it particularly for the newest guys who are learning the basics, but each guy has specific challenges, sticking points, etc. In addition, each guy has different internal psychological challenges, and those internal challenges are very hard to self-diagnose. Almost all of us want to protect our own egos and so turn away from difficult truths… me included. To be the best, however, we need to get feedback on our challenges and to ultimately confront them. Or to just improve.

Write your player blog. It’s an advertisement, but not in the way you think. To get into the deeper levels, you need to show that you’re not an idiot (most guys are idiots) and that you’re willing to put in the effort necessary to make progress. Write your player blog and reach out to the guys who don’t seem to be idiots. That’s where the better ideas, coaching, encouragement, etc. happen. You likely won’t get into the substantive and specific conversations without some demonstration that you’re not an idiot first. The blog is that demonstration.

The blog need not even be unique. You can just write about what you’re doing, what’s happening to you, what you notice with chicks, etc. Even a blog about blowouts is going to be more interesting than what most guys are doing (nothing, or repeating platitudes, or writing vaguely about why this one special girl isn’t into them, etc.). Most guys don’t get the feedback they need to improve.

This is a kind of “do as I say, not as I do” moment of advice. I have spent most of my time as a player struggling to learn things on my own instead of accelerating my learning by tapping into the advice/guidance of others. It has worked out okay for me, but I could have done better and probably should have. I also didn’t realize that the material that rises to the level of blogs, or twitter, is only a small amount of that which remains in private chats.

I’m going to be a bit arrogant and say that I am better at this than most guys, and I am still amazed at all the s**t other guys come up with and observe. If that’s true of me, it’s likely true of you as well. There are many guys much better at this than I am, too. Some of them are writing publicly… I include many of their blogs in the links panel… and I bet almost all of them will have more specific and detailed advice in private than they do in public. But they, like me, don’t want to waste time on wankers. Most of the guys I have been speaking to in private, I have also been reading in public for months or years.

Consider this story… in college when that happened, I was operating by instinct and didn’t really know what I was doing… I think that is one reason I encourage guys to write online… most guys have no idea what we’re doing… game gives us a framework. To take my work specifically, with sex clubs, almost no one is writing about this topic. Non-mono more generally is covered by a handful of people… like me, Blackdragon (when he is not pitching “Alpha male magic 3.0 yeah baby yeah conference”), now some from Yoylo and Magnum at times… and that’s it… it’s mostly invisible to most players. The guys who stumble into it, are also doing it by accident (I have some examples of this but they have been sent to me in private). We need to turn game from lore into a proper program, a proper course of study.

THE GAME and MYSTERY METHOD turned seduction from lore into a proper program… and they are still valuable… I am seeking to do the same… I would not have been able to do this without starting the blog… now I hope that others will take up the ideas and extend/apply it. It can be done. The lows are low… but the highs are high.

Don’t ask for nudes. Don’t be pleased if you get them too soon.

Don’t ask for nudes. Don’t be pleased if you get them too soon. I’ve come to realize getting nudes is only a good sign if they arrive after I’ve f**ked her… then the nudes say, “There’s more of this coming your way and I want to entice you.” If she sends them beforehand I seem to be further away from f**king her (and I might never).

Why? I’m not 100% sure, but some chicks appear to substitute nudes for actual f**king. It’s worse if the guy asks…. or so girls tell me… asking for nudes seems to be a demonstration of lower value (DLV) and hot girls are bombarded with requests from low-value guys. I don’t have a strong theory about why this appears to be true, just observation. Some people now seem to prefer masturbatory stimulation to real live sex. Maybe I’m just old school but that’s not me. I’m also old-school enough to not have spent my adolescence and young adulthood watching hours of HD Internet porn every day. In my formative years, we had pics and some video, sure, but the bulk of sexual activity and stimulation had to occur live and in person.

Dexter speculates

My guess is if a woman she sends an explicit pic to you before f**king she thinks to herself

” shit…I sent this guy a nude so if we meet he’ll be expecting sex right off the bat ”

It takes away her plausible deniability.

That’s a fine theory… others may be constructed. Mr. V daygame said,

You forget that woman and men speak a different language. A guy wants pics of tits, a girl doesn’t want pics of dicks. That’s a clear example how men and woman are seduced differently

I only send them if the woman specifically asks for them (some do)… I don’t think a woman has ever asked for pics or videos before she’s had sex with me… after sex, she has a narrative and experiences to connect the visuals to. If she coyly asks I might say, “So you want me to send you nudes.” Again, I’m pretty sure this only ever happens after we’ve f**ked for a while. The story and experiences makes them valuable to her, in a way random guys aren’t. Without the story, they’re just another random guy’s body, and women can see male bodies, even very nice ones, any time they want.

Let me clarify… I am not against nudes at all and have shot thousands of them, almost all of them post sex, when the woman is very much in my frame and flooded with positive emotions and openness after being f**ked. A lot of women who are happy to pose right after being f**ked will later ask that they be deleted. A note for students of female psychology. Answers as to what this means can be posted in the comments.

A very nice camera is now as little as a couple hundred dollars… I remember the first reasonably priced DSLR, the Canon Rebel, that cost $999 or $1199 with lens, I believe. We live in a different world.

If she sends you nudes, try to get her on a date with good logistics as soon as possible. If you can’t get her on the date, she’s seeking attention and that’s it. I’m not in it for attention or for pictures… I’m in it for the physical pleasure and the psychological, spiritual, and physical connection… that’s where the good stuff is.

Guys who really want to get laid, focus on the things/behaviors/strategies that lead in that direction, and ignore other things. Asking for nudes is not a good step on the route to getting laid. I think a lot of guys reading and chatting online are not truly into getting laid.

How many marry out of tiredness or desperation?

I wonder how many guys (and girls) get in relationships or marriages not because they really truly want to, but because their dating markets are thin and the courtship process is onerous and annoying.

There’s no way to answer this question, but I bet the number of people who are in relationships because they really truly want to be is smaller than the number of people who are in relationships because they feel they can’t do better, or are tired of flakey chicks, etc. I believe that, subconsciously, I responded well to non-monogamy for a bunch of reasons… one being that it can effectively deal with the large number of flakey chicks out there. One reliable girl is better than 10 flakey ones and if a flakey one shows up on a date with the reliable girl, it’s a win-win.

Get outside of the big cities and you’ll see the dating market get really thin really fast. In that environment, pairing up makes sense, because the good ones won’t be on the market forever. It’s more attractive to be an eternal bachelor in the thicker, dense cities, because there is always new tail around the corner.

Women can think the same thing but the biological clock is working against them to a much greater degree past age 30. So many women in their 30s in the big cities are trending towards spinsterhood because they misuse their valuable assets.

Very few people do things for entirely “rational” reasons (I used to think I knew what “rational” means in general, now I don’t really), and understanding our own internal drives is very difficult.

“Why meeting another’s gaze is so powerful:” the power of eye contact

Eye contact, eye contact, eye contact.

As well as sending our brains into social overdrive, research also shows that eye contact shapes our perception of the other person who meets our gaze. For instance, we generally perceive people who make more eye contact to be more intelligent, more conscientious and sincere (in Western cultures, at least), and we become more inclined to believe what they say.

Of course, too much eye contact can also make us uncomfortable – and people who stare without letting go can come across as creepy. In one study conducted at a science museum, psychologists recently tried to establish the preferred length of eye contact. They concluded that, on average, it is three seconds long (and no one preferred gazes that lasted longer than nine seconds).

Players practice it. Chicks respond to it.

Another documented effect of mutual gaze may help explain why that moment of eye contact across a room can sometimes feel so compelling. A recent study found that mutual gaze leads to a kind of partial melding of the self and other: we rate strangers with whom we’ve made eye contact as more similar to us, in terms of their personality and appearance

If she holds your eyes for those three seconds, go talk to her immediately. This chick is an example of eye contact’s power.

“He is exactly the kind of partner a liberated woman is supposed to want, and yet she despises him for it”

I’ve been saying that women are the truest red pillers… now we see an article by a chick, about books written by chicks, that are as red pill as anything comes… it’s about whether a novel can “capture the contradictions of female desire,” but it’s not hard to understand… one just has to remember that chicks are random and also that many chicks don’t want to be accountable for their decisions. Seriously, the chicks writing the novels and the chick writing the article agree with me, just not in the exact framing I use…

Their behavior mystifies them, and they discover that the selective work of authorship can relieve their confusion: if they choose some moments from their past and discard others, if they arrange these moments in just the right way, they might be able to understand themselves as logical and consistent, free of the messy task of figuring out what they want, and the even messier one of fully accepting these wants.

When guys ask women logical questions about the woman’s behavior and don’t get logical answers, that’s often because the woman herself doesn’t know. “Their behavior mystifies them.” One thing most chicks hate, however, is boredom, as we see here.

Of the intervening years, we have learned that she married and abruptly divorced a kale-loving man, a classmate in her grad-school cohort, whom she describes as “nice” and “ever so understanding.” She is mocking him. He is exactly the kind of partner a liberated woman is supposed to want, and yet she despises him for it.

Nice guys are boring. “Liberated” women want what other women want.

Years after her ur-erotic hotel-room encounter, the narrator finds herself in another hotel room, this time with a man she has picked up in the bar downstairs. Her husband is at home and thinks she is away at a job interview or visiting friends; she can’t remember. Alone with the stranger, the narrator tells him that she wants to be dominated. This time she’s articulating her desire, rather than discovering it through someone else’s, and in the act of articulation she can’t help but come face to face with her own agency. But the fantasy itself is for the opposite: “I hate making choices,” she says.

If she wants it, the husband doesn’t matter, the previous agreements don’t matter… all that matters is the moment. The impressive thing is that she says she wants to be dominated. Most women want guys to intuit that, to just know it. But “I hate making choices…” that’s why smart guys minimize the choices chicks need to make. In the old world, the anthropological hunter-gatherer world and then the agricultural world, chicks didn’t have many choices to make. They married who their families, mostly their fathers and brothers, told them to marry. Now we are surprised that a lot of chicks are unhappy to be introduced into the world of intense mating competition and that many chicks are ambivalent about the choices in front of them. Chicks live in the land of maybe, but most guys are never taught this.

Most guys don’t understand what women want during sex, or how to give it to them…

This contrast—of women raring to assert their agency in one context, then willing, even eager, to relinquish it another—captured my interest in part because of its familiarity. I’d seen it crop up recently in widely praised works both written by and featuring brazen, outspoken, and almost always middle-class white women. It’s in Sally Rooney’s “Conversations with Friends,” when Frances tries unsuccessfully to get Nick—older, married, kind—to choke and hit her during sex. And in Rooney’s “Normal People,” when Marianne discloses to gentle, sensitive Connell, her on-again-off-again boyfriend, that another man has hit her with a belt, choked her—that she asked for it, enjoyed it.

Read from the right perspective, this “feminist” article in a feminist magazine about feminist novels tells us more about real chicks than most of the man-hating feminist writing. There are some dysfunctional women who hate men and some dysfunctional men who hate women, but most of all guys need to learn to understand chicks, and then their behavior becomes clearer. Chicks are often like random-number generators, a fact that explains my interactions with many chicks the interactions so many men have with chicks.

This article is great reading for confused guys.

Women are the truest red pillers.