The Myth of 'The Natural'

fastlife

Master Don Juan
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
1,132
Reaction score
2,164
The other night I talked on the phone with one of my buddies. We'll call him Mark. Mark is one of a handful of guys I've met my whole life who I'd consider a 'Natural.' We've known each other about 8 years; he's a couple years older than me and was really the one who showed me the ropes before I found the community. In fact, I remember being horrified when he was telling me how should handle a girl who was being wishy-washy at the time that I was all caught up on: "Dude, just look her in the eyes and, say, 'You're such a fvcking b1tch,' but, like, say it with a smirk". I didn't take his advice, but some of his brashness rubbed off on me and I ended up sleeping with her. We'd go out and game girls before I knew what that was.

Mark's love life, the whole time I've known him, follows this pattern: Mark falls in love with a girl, he cheats on her. She either retaliates & he can't believe she'd treat him that way and goes on an absolute rampage (like two girls the same day or driving cross country to kick it with all his exes--Mark has exes everywhere). Or she'll break up with him & he'll stop at nothing to win her back. If he wins her back, the cycle repeats itself. Often Mark'll be at different stages of this process with multiple girls simultaneously. I remember one time, after pining after an ex for months & being depressed, he looked at me, laughed, and said: "Dude she's busted anyway."

And, every now & then, he'll put himself through period of self-enforced celibacy that never last too long.

The rest of his life is, in general, a train wreck. Mark is short, chronically on the rocks financially, and rarely in a position to shower regularly. But he's fun to be around, has friend everywhere he goes, and is never short for female attention. Hot, ugly, single, married, young, old, doesn't matter to him. In the time I've known him he's dated everything from good girls from wealthy families to total drug addict degenerates.

But, for all that, Mark is pretty self-aware. He generally can tell you why certain things work with certain girls and even why he does the things he does--even if he's powerless to change the cycle. However, I think, for the most part, this is all done retroactively. In the moment, he's just being Mark.

In short, I don't think he's ever had reason to look up how to get girls. But over the last 8 years, Mark has had access to something we all do: The Internet. When I last saw him a couple years ago, he went off on a spiel about something related to Alpha males to explain the social dynamics we'd found ourselves in at the time. On the phone the other night, he said something about Incels. My guess is he stumbled upon a couple things online that made sense to him and explained why his life moves the way it does.

The point of this post is this: whether you get your knowledge of women online, or you got it from your dad, or your older brother, or because you were popular in high school and had opportunities to practice, every guy is running some sort of game. They all got their knowledge from somewhere. No one is just born with it--and I've yet to meet the guy who, at all points in his life, found himself in the opportunity to just be flawless with women & didn't have to learn a few hard lessons along the way. Mark, I think, probably just benefited from his natural emotional instability; in high school, he probably benefited from being the rebel who did drugs; in the process, he got enough exposure to women to formulate his 'game.'

There's a tendency to pedestalize or even envy guys who didn't have to actively learn game. Just because you had to consciously gain knowledge doesn't cheapen the value of that knowledge. Having to actively practice a skill set doesn't diminish the value of that skill. If you met me in the past couple years, you'd probably think that I was 'a natural'--and you'd be right--at this point I don't think about what I'm doing; I don't do awkard sh1t anymore, I can make it look effortless--BUT you wouldn't see the amount of time I put into getting to this point, you wouldn't see me at home on a Saturday night reading advice from anonymous dudes online, you wouldn't see the blowouts or the bad nights. Like I said, Mark probably didn't have to consciously learn game; but you're naive if you don't think every guy alive hasn't stumbled onto some game-related advice online at some point. And the outcome is the same, no matter how you learn it.
 

taiyuu_otoko

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
5,350
Reaction score
3,987
Location
象外
But I never received a lesson in that whole process that has been going on for 3 decades now.

Everything was always an experiment, to which lessons were learned.
This is essentially how humans are hard wired to learn any behavioral skill. Trial, feedback, continuous slow improvements, etc.

A guy like @Amante Silvestre learning game naturally is similar to guy slowly getting better in sales over several years.

Unfortunately, learning game this way is pretty terrifying for most folks, so much that many refuse to acknowledge it's even a possibility.

One might even conclude that learning game consciously (reading and thinking etc.) is a much slower and clunkier process.
 

mrgoodstuff

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 27, 2015
Messages
17,885
Reaction score
12,121
Location
DFW, TX
That’s where I think the difference is. Not in learning, but the Pace.

Like a 10 year old that throws a near perfect spiral without a lot of previous experience, while other 10 year olds are just learning how to properly hold a football.

Sure, any kid can learn how to do it when enough practice and effort is put in, and every 10 year old still has to learn the game of football regardless of talent level.

But who is leading the pack? Who is leading by example? Who is leading the way for others to see, study and aspire to become?

The “natural” is often the person doing those things.

Anyone can read the OP again and see exactly that.
Its going to be much faster to learn from another due to mirror nuerons and wavelength.
 

Bokanovsky

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jul 7, 2012
Messages
4,830
Reaction score
4,513
I am going to disagree with you somewhat. There are certianly some men who are more natural with women than others. Just like some men are more athletic than others and some are more suited to being pilots and astronauts (their bodies and brains handle G-forces better). Some people are born with a fear of heights; others, have claustrophobia. Some people can't stand the thought of speaking to a large crowd; others actually enjoy it. To be a "natural", you need two things: a) be an extrovert; and b) have no social anxiety around women.
 

If you currently have too many women chasing you, calling you, harassing you, knocking on your door at 2 o'clock in the morning... then I have the simple solution for you.

Just read my free ebook 22 Rules for Massive Success With Women and do the opposite of what I recommend.

This will quickly drive all women away from you.

And you will be able to relax and to live your life in peace and quiet.

taiyuu_otoko

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
5,350
Reaction score
3,987
Location
象外
But who is leading the pack? Who is leading by example? Who is leading the way for others to see, study and aspire to become?
I would argue that up to couple of decades ago, most guys would simply emulate the best among their friends. Naturals were more natural.

I finished HS in 85 and college in 90. Both places I had plenty of "natural" role models who'd I'd attempt to copy. And I could ask questions, get feedback if needed.

The learning process was more natural.

Today, not so much.

Finding role models online essentially forces the process through a more academic set of mental filters.

Copying behaviors consciously/unconsciously from real live role models is a much more organic process.

Today it can be tough if one doesn't have access to real life in-field role models.

Most guys that achieve success today FORCE themselves into a trial-error learning environment.
 

Trump

Banned
Joined
Mar 12, 2011
Messages
3,032
Reaction score
1,677
I completely disagree.

You think all those guys who got rich did it being reading books and learning from other rich guys? No way. They did it through a combination of luck, genetics, and common sense. It’s the same thing with girls.

Any girl can tell if your conversation if forced or contrived. Any girl can tell if you have been working Game or reading pick up books. Just like any guy in business knows instantly if the other person is a fool or not. It’s all the same thing, just different sport.

A lot of people ask me where did I learn how to flirt so well or how am I so funny. I didn’t learn from anyone, it’s who I am.

There is such thing as a Natural.
 

zekko

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
16,063
Reaction score
8,903
There is such thing as a Natural.
I agree that real naturals exist. I know someone who is a pretty big, muscular guy, and is above average looking. He also has an aggressive streak. I imagine that comes from being a big guy, and wrestling with his brother (who is also a natural, from what I understand). Girls have always gravitated toward him, have always liked him, they feel safe around him. You can see their behavior change when they get around him, you can tell that they are turned on by him. He knows girls will like him, so he expects it and acts accordingly. That guy is a natural.
 

marmel75

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
7,231
Reaction score
5,636
Its like anything in life...some people are just better at some things than others...Michael Jordan and Lebron James are better at basketball...Tom Brady and Bruce Smith are better at football...Tiger Woods was better at golf...some guys are better with women.

Its not different than anything else...but they also probably have worked hard at it also...maybe not openly but they go on dates and bang chicks regularly and see what works/didn't work. Maybe they naturally embody the mindset of a guy who is successful with women and start off from a much bettee place than most guys do. Maybe they quickly learn how to manipulate women the way they often manipulate men. Maybe its a combination of both.

Whatever it is they are both fast learners and starting from a better starting position...just like a guy who has 500K in the bank will more often than not become a millionaire faster than a guy with $500 in the bank...
 

fastlife

Master Don Juan
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
1,132
Reaction score
2,164
Funny the amount of 'naturals' on a game forum lol. And don't get me wrong--I'm definitely not arguing that everyone is starting from the same point--some guys are naturally more aggressive, more extroverted, better looking, more risk-tolerant, etc. And good for them. But I'm arguing that, regardless of the process, the outcome is the same.

And, with enough repetition over enough time, every action becomes natural. Of course, you have to go out & take your knocks. No amount of reading will change that. And, to the guys arguing that girls can tell the difference between the 'real thing' over a 'good fake'--wanna know how I know you're keyboard jockeying.

Plus, I'm arguing that as soon as you introduce a conscious aspect (such as reading a game forum) to a set of behaviors, then any action that stems from that knowledge is no longer fully natural. It's learned. And there's not a guy alive in the first world in the internet age who hasn't been exposed to 'game' in some form--no matter how tangentially. There's no shame in learning things that improve your life. And if your life isn't where you want it to be, the absolutely last thing you should be doing is not actively gaining that knowledge.
 

Spaz

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2018
Messages
8,433
Reaction score
6,929
And, with enough repetition over enough time, every action becomes natural.
This part is true.

And, to the guys arguing that girls can tell the difference between the 'real thing' over a 'good fake'--wanna know how I know you're keyboard jockeying.
This depends on the inherent personality type of said man.

If he's not born a dominant but even when he is practised or trained as a dominant he is still wired as a passive - intellectual/expressive personality.

It's when a man is severely tested that those traits will manifest itself.

The other night I talked on the phone with one of my buddies. We'll call him Mark. Mark is one of a handful of guys I've met my whole life who I'd consider a 'Natural.' We've known each other about 8 years; he's a couple years older than me and was really the one who showed me the ropes before I found the community. In fact, I remember being horrified when he was telling me how should handle a girl who was being wishy-washy at the time that I was all caught up on: "Dude, just look her in the eyes and, say, 'You're such a fvcking b1tch,' but, like, say it with a smirk". I didn't take his advice, but some of his brashness rubbed off on me and I ended up sleeping with her. We'd go out and game girls before I knew what that was.

Mark's love life, the whole time I've known him, follows this pattern: Mark falls in love with a girl, he cheats on her. She either retaliates & he can't believe she'd treat him that way and goes on an absolute rampage (like two girls the same day or driving cross country to kick it with all his exes--Mark has exes everywhere). Or she'll break up with him & he'll stop at nothing to win her back. If he wins her back, the cycle repeats itself. Often Mark'll be at different stages of this process with multiple girls simultaneously. I remember one time, after pining after an ex for months & being depressed, he looked at me, laughed, and said: "Dude she's busted anyway."

And, every now & then, he'll put himself through period of self-enforced celibacy that never last too long.

The rest of his life is, in general, a train wreck. Mark is short, chronically on the rocks financially, and rarely in a position to shower regularly. But he's fun to be around, has friend everywhere he goes, and is never short for female attention. Hot, ugly, single, married, young, old, doesn't matter to him. In the time I've known him he's dated everything from good girls from wealthy families to total drug addict degenerates.

But, for all that, Mark is pretty self-aware. He generally can tell you why certain things work with certain girls and even why he does the things he does--even if he's powerless to change the cycle. However, I think, for the most part, this is all done retroactively. In the moment, he's just being Mark.

In short, I don't think he's ever had reason to look up how to get girls. But over the last 8 years, Mark has had access to something we all do: The Internet. When I last saw him a couple years ago, he went off on a spiel about something related to Alpha males to explain the social dynamics we'd found ourselves in at the time. On the phone the other night, he said something about Incels. My guess is he stumbled upon a couple things online that made sense to him and explained why his life moves the way it does.

The point of this post is this: whether you get your knowledge of women online, or you got it from your dad, or your older brother, or because you were popular in high school and had opportunities to practice, every guy is running some sort of game. They all got their knowledge from somewhere. No one is just born with it--and I've yet to meet the guy who, at all points in his life, found himself in the opportunity to just be flawless with women & didn't have to learn a few hard lessons along the way. Mark, I think, probably just benefited from his natural emotional instability; in high school, he probably benefited from being the rebel who did drugs; in the process, he got enough exposure to women to formulate his 'game.'

There's a tendency to pedestalize or even envy guys who didn't have to actively learn game. Just because you had to consciously gain knowledge doesn't cheapen the value of that knowledge. Having to actively practice a skill set doesn't diminish the value of that skill. If you met me in the past couple years, you'd probably think that I was 'a natural'--and you'd be right--at this point I don't think about what I'm doing; I don't do awkard sh1t anymore, I can make it look effortless--BUT you wouldn't see the amount of time I put into getting to this point, you wouldn't see me at home on a Saturday night reading advice from anonymous dudes online, you wouldn't see the blowouts or the bad nights. Like I said, Mark probably didn't have to consciously learn game; but you're naive if you don't think every guy alive hasn't stumbled onto some game-related advice online at some point. And the outcome is the same, no matter how you learn it.
Your friend Mark is from the expressive personality quadrant.

You are from the intellectual personality quadrant.

You have not yet "tested" the motivators and doers who are naturally dominant.

As such ur "test" is only "half baked" but the message you put forth to those in the same personality as both you and Mark is most certainly laudable.

That certainly seems like a sustainable methodology.
 

Chi Town

Banned
Joined
Sep 12, 2018
Messages
665
Reaction score
691
Age
31
Not a myth.......a natural is someone who is good at attracting women with his natural personality/way of carrying himself.....

All the things non naturals had to be taught was natural to him, like how guys had to be taught to not call too much, or use ****y funny, or how to not show too much interest, well the natural did that without being taught or told, he didn't have to "Learn" to do those things it's just natural instinct for him to do that.

He didn't have to learn to "escalate" he did that naturally because he was horny and wanted to fvck.

He didn't have to be taught to not be to available, he was naturally unavailable because he has a life outside of women.

That's what a natural is, if you had to learn how to be attractive to women or taught then you are not a natural.

A Natural is naturally attractive to women, he doesn't even need to learn game because he doesn't need game, his natural personality and behavior attracts women.

Example:
I didn't have to be taught to push/pull with women, I did that based on my natural instinct, when I was a teenager and I was flirting with a girl I would think to myself
"Ok let me chill for a minute and ignore her a lil because i don't wanna look like I'm trying to hard, let me give her the opportunity to invest in the interaction"

That's natural, I wasn't taught to do that, I didn't even know that helped build attraction.

Like ****y/funny, I'm naturally a cheeky and very blunt person so that kind of humor is apart of my natural personality, I didn't even know it was a term, I was just being myself.
 

zekko

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
16,063
Reaction score
8,903
Its not different than anything else...but they also probably have worked hard at it also...maybe not openly but they go on dates and bang chicks regularly and see what works/didn't work. Maybe they naturally embody the mindset of a guy who is successful with women and start off from a much bettee place than most guys do.
I'm sure they probably at least have an abundance mindset to some extent. But I doubt that they all have total PUA traits and tactics. Remember, guys who are naturally attractive can get away with more, girls will forgive them their flaws, or even find them adorable. So a truly attractive guy can probably just go with his own personality (whatever that might be) and still draw in a lot of women. Even if a lot of guys here might dismiss some of their actions as AFC.
 

marmel75

Master Don Juan
Joined
Jan 4, 2012
Messages
7,231
Reaction score
5,636
I'm sure they probably at least have an abundance mindset to some extent. But I doubt that they all have total PUA traits and tactics. Remember, guys who are naturally attractive can get away with more, girls will forgive them their flaws, or even find them adorable. So a truly attractive guy can probably just go with his own personality (whatever that might be) and still draw in a lot of women. Even if a lot of guys here might dismiss some of their actions as AFC.
This is true but a lot of these guys who are so called "Naturals" are average looking or even below average looking in some cases and it doesn't seem to matter
 

zekko

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
16,063
Reaction score
8,903
They do, because it's the type of thing you pick up dating.
You pick up certain things about women with experience. But that doesn't mean you necessarily adopt all short term mating strategies, which is what pickup is mostly about.

Also, some naturals are less pessimistic about women than your average PUA, because they have mostly positive experiences.
 

If you currently have too many women chasing you, calling you, harassing you, knocking on your door at 2 o'clock in the morning... then I have the simple solution for you.

Just read my free ebook 22 Rules for Massive Success With Women and do the opposite of what I recommend.

This will quickly drive all women away from you.

And you will be able to relax and to live your life in peace and quiet.

zekko

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
16,063
Reaction score
8,903
That first paragraph is just...so wrong. Maybe you're projecting your opinion of what a great guy is onto the reality of the natural seducer.
Not at all, it's observation. A lot of naturals are pump and dumpers, it's true, but I know many who give marriage a try also. The guy I mentioned on the previous page is on his second marriage. Maybe it's because I live in a fairly conservative area, but only partly. I may also be thinking of an older age group than you.

To me, a natural is a guy who is naturally good with women, who women are attracted to. Lots of these guys find value in having a steady companion, I don't know why they wouldn't. It's a preference. You seem to be saying that a natural is a short term mater, by definition, which I disagree with. I'm sure most of them go through that stage though.

I don't think it's unusual for a guy to want to settle down after awhile, to want something deeper. Naturals are no exception.
 

Mike32ct

Master Don Juan
Joined
Oct 22, 2007
Messages
8,105
Reaction score
4,716
Location
Eastern Time Zone where it's always really late
This is true but a lot of these guys who are so called "Naturals" are average looking or even below average looking in some cases and it doesn't seem to matter
Despite their non-Chad looks, the planets were otherwise in good alignment for these “natural” guys.

1. Extroverted personality
2. Parents let them socialize.
3. In with a good social circle of friends (and girls) early on.
 

zekko

Master Don Juan
Joined
Aug 6, 2009
Messages
16,063
Reaction score
8,903
Natural means a natural seducer which means demonstrated skill in seduction, not settled down.
When people say "Natural", I take it to mean a man that women are naturally attracted to.
 

The_411

Master Don Juan
Joined
Feb 20, 2005
Messages
964
Reaction score
150
Naturals are not a myth. The problem is that being a natural has different interpretations to different people hence the confusion.

As mentioned in this thread being a natural is like leadership you are born with a certain skill range and you can improve but only to top of the range.

I’ve known a quite a few naturals and while they would be classified as attractive from a physical standpoint, what stands out is their smoothness of operation. (Lack of outcome dependency) They all share the ability to make others feel good regardless of sex. They aren’t afraid of the moment and live moments understanding that any moment is precious.

Now that last one sounds cheesy, but it comes down the concept that when you hang out with naturals you get the sense that they make things happen (leadership through action).

Naturals also grasp that any moment is a possibility to attract a woman.

Charisma is a big part of the equation as is self-belief and creating and setting mood.
 
Top