A Nice Trend - Don't Next So Fast

[JT7890]

Yeah we might have to just agree to disagree lol.

I think Sosuave has it's place with the male empowerment, but to be honest I still don't see how this is a supposed male empowerment forum when 90% of the conversations here center around women, yet, everyone responds that this is a male empowerment forum. I don't get it lol.

If this were a real male empowerment forum, then you would see a LOT more posting in the Health and Fitness Section, it would mirror the size of the Don Juan Discussion, you would see alot more thinking strategies on here, how to plan your day, there would be a college section, financial section, general education section, a section on understanding our bodies, a political section etc. Lol, there's none of that here, majority of the conversations resemble around women. But again, you might say well, "JT is just taking this forum to literally!" Whatever the fvck that means.

Just keep it real guys, this isn't a male empowerment forum. This isn't a self improvement forum. This is a forum that uses keyboard jockeys and theories to "seduce" women instead of field reports and field action like a speed seduction website would. Why won't you guys admit that?

 

[Boilermaker]

Just keep it real guys, this isn't a male empowerment forum. This isn't a self improvement forum. This is a forum that uses keyboard jockeys and theories to "seduce" women instead of field reports and field action like a speed seduction website would. Why won't you guys admit that?

Field reports are loose experiments. They are not connected to our common ground. We don't know your life. We don't know your circle. We don't know your friends. Your reports are worthless without their essence carefully picked out. Being able to discern what matters and what does not is a skill in itself and that's why there are ten experimentalists to one theorist in almost any branch of science. That's why there's only a handful of people who made a name for themselves in the community (Roissy, Pook) although there are thousands of us, "big thinkers" out there.

Field reports are giving us raw data, but we already have plenty of data. We need analyzers, theorists, Rollo's dissecting the overwhelming information to point out the generalities. We do not need to listen another trivial story about ONE particular woman to change our behavior. Get it?

Unless, of course, you think you have information that is persistently disagreeing with established "theory". But unfortunately, scoring two girls with some magic technique you devised does NOT qualify for a refutation of that sort.


Just look at the title of your thread, who started the "Eureka" game here? :yes:

 

[Rollo Tomassi]

generalization

n 1: the process of formulating general concepts by abstracting common properties of instances [syn: abstraction, generalisation] 2: reasoning from detailed facts to general principles [syn: generalisation, induction, inductive reasoning] 3: an idea having general application; "he spoke in broad generalities" [syn: generalization, generality] 4: (psychology) transfer of a response learned to one stimulus to a similar stimulus [syn: generalisation, stimulus generalization, stimulus generalisation]
Source: WordNet ® 2.0


Generalization gets a bum rap. The term ougt to be used in the way it was actually intended - drawing hypothesis and conclusions from a greater, general whole of observed behavior. Pay close attention to #2, "reasoning from detailed facts to general principles [syn: generalisation, induction, inductive reasoning]." I am sorry if this process offends you, but I'm interested in general Rules, since it, and not the exceptions to it, better help to predict an outcome.

Like it or not generalizations are useful and we use them all the time to see the forest for the trees. It's not isolated abnormalities in a system that we use to describe the circumstances of that system, it's the whole. We study majorities to assess overall condition, not isolations. That's the scientific definition of generalities, but when they refer to things that are close to us we tend to put ourselves into the generalization and cop the "not-in-my-case" menality. We'd like to think that our experiences are unique and special (and they are, to us), but in the generality we're simply statistics. So the word 'Generalize' gets a negative connotation and the person using it is vilified, because it's an afront to our "special" conditions.

 

[zekko]

Now, I also find that the girl makes you wait on purpose before she goes out with you. So she spends a little more time on the phone and text to get to know you a little, get a feel for your personality, etc.

Personally, I can't stand talking on the phone, so it's not something I would do.

However, I could envision a scenario where the above would be effective. Women are weaker than males physically. We've all heard stories on the news about women being murdered and stuffed in dumpsters or whatever. It makes more sense for a woman to try to get to know a guy rather than going to a perfect stranger's home right away. To err on the side of caution.

Of course that idea will offend the sensibilities of the PUA community, where the goal is to proceed directly to intercourse in as quick a manner as possible. Heck, these guys don't even want to wait to get the girl home half the time, as they relish in the idea of shagging in the club bathroom, or out in the back alley.

 

[Big O]

... I normally call on day two (which is basically the next day, if I got her number at night I'll call the afternoon of the next day).

I got a girl's number this past Friday night, and texted her Saturday late afternoon to ask her out. I felt there was a spark, so why play waiting games?

Now, I also find that the girl makes you wait on purpose before she goes out with you. So she spends a little more time on the phone and text to get to know you a little, get a feel for your personality, etc.

I don't see anything wrong with this, I'd probably do it too if I were a girl: you don't want to seem to available, you also want to screen the guy a little bit, etc.

I find that if the girl gave you her number, for the most part, you had something that attracted her (looks, personality, or both). But, in order to get her to spend time with you, fvck you, take it to a relationship, you have to be a little more persistent on the telephone.

Sure, as long as she's still picking up the phone, and returning calls and texts, you at least have a chance. So keep talking to her.

I would say on average, I would spend about a week or two on the telephone/texting with a chick before she "chills" with me. Once I get them to chill with me it's over, my conversion to sex ratio is pretty high from that point on.

This seems normal to me, and many people are busy. A week goes by very quickly, and two weeks really isn't that big of a deal.

 

[Solomon]

My thoughts

And this is what I have to tell you guys about my experience: If you increase the volume of women in your life, you will naturally find ones who will do whatever you want, and however you want it. It only feels like the ball is in her court if she is the ONLY ONE you are talking to. Of course it is in her court. You either have no other options/or you're not pursuing enough options. No particular RANDOM chick you have just met while drunk in a nightclub is that important for you to be following "RULES" for in the first place. Just increase the volume of women in your life so you can get to the point where you really.....DON'T CARE. If you are going to be playing the game, I advise you to play it this way, otherwise you will care too much and get wrapped up in rules some dude made up decades ago.

You don't think women know how much options you have, but they know. And the more options you have, the higher your value. For a high value guy, rules don't exist. Kinda ****ed up, but it's the way things are.

This is a gem right here and if a lot of guys read this it would solve 85% of the boards problem, Golden Shyt

--OP--
Does it work? Sure it does, either way can work(I personally don't have time too many women out there) Now to the OP, what it all comes down to is balance. The problem with forums/bloggers etc is that everyone comes from a black and white mindset, meaning for example if your not alpha then your beta, if your not strong then your weak. What a lot of these guys are missing out on is balance. When I talk balance I don't mean having hobbies and not worrying about chicks. I'm talking about having balance in your game, so you can be versatile. Even the alpha has to show vulnerability once in awhile to his lady. Even the badboy has to cuddle with is girl after blowing her back out for two hours once in awhile etc. This whole notion that only one way of "gaming" works is hogwash. I've done some super AFC things, and still managed to get the girl or lay or whatever have you. Which brings me to my second point

Theories are useless without them being tested. Hence you need balance on this site. I have already expressed how I feel about the lack of support on this forum that the field reporter gets. The truth is though that theories without experimentation are nothing. Why do you think Mystery has approached over 12,000 women? there is a reason why he is respected not because he just talks about it but he test his theories(even though a few are complete b.s. i.e. 7 hour theory complete crap!). what I find lame is the posters who say FR's are useless and what not. Hate to say it but I couldn't appreciate Pook's post or Rollo's until I hit the field. You see I understood what they were saying but there is a difference between understanding what someone says and "embodying" it. It took me a good year and a thousand approaches to go back and read what they had to say to grasp it, by that time. I had grown to a point were i understood what was being said, even if Im not at the level Pook is gamewise I understand because now I have experience. If it wasn't for the great FR's that I read by Jon24, rushingdude123, Snowplow etc. I probably still would be clueless. I had the positive attitude to fail to succeed but I needed the wheels i.e. techniques(something Pook shunned). The truth is theories are dandy but 70% of that shyt isn't needed. When your talking to that hot girl all goes out the window, the whole "open-****y&funny-neg-reverse-qualification-if she says this then do that, don't forget to show intent blah blah blah", whatever model your using won't apply because the interaction will go so quick that if you think about it, you may lose momentum(this is why certain shyt doesn't work with certain girls, hence the game isn't black and white). I really think it sucks that when you see other forums support their Field reporters and have their own sections, guys meeting up posting pics and what not and here guys would rather day after day armchair help the clueless AFC when you have guys who need help out meeting women in the first place. Before you can read on relationship theory you need to be out there meeting/finding women to be with period, what good is theory if your just sitting there talking about it? sadly this is the case for a lot of gamers. I know guys who are so enamored in knowing all the theory because they think it will help them in the field and then when we go out they seldom approach.

Just my 02. cents

 

[Boilermaker]

This is a gem right here and if a lot of guys read this it would solve 85% of the boards problem, Golden Shyt

Increasing the volume of women in one's life is easier said than done. Of course, it'd solve a lot of problems. Unfortunately, preaching "thy shall increase the number of women in your life" to the masses is just another way of saying "good luck" , it doesn't mean anything.

HOW exactly do you do that is the real question and has no one-liner. I don't believe it's a very striking idea, it is the first thing that comes to mind, yeah sure who couldn't use more women to experiment with ?

It seems like you are proposing to cold approach - but you'll probably admit that it is not enjoyable, nor convenient for all of us. I prefer something more productive than going to the same bars for 5 years straight just for the sake of meeting women.

Something must accumulate in the process as we interact with women, something like dancing, a skill that we can hone, and this is why Jophil has been telling us dunderheads to go join a dance club for years. (Well, personally I did) :yes:

Will anyone recognize me except the bartender in a college-bar after 5 years of heavy sarging? I don't think so ..
What about doing 5 years of Salsa? Well, even if you don't know anyone, yo will surely be the center of attention as soon as you start rolling. That's why I don't like cold approaching. It focuses too much on the approach, surrendering the frame from the start. The ultimate purpose is to win the woman. That's not entirely alpha. Women should be by-products in a man's journey; at all costs.

 

[goodfoot]

Increasing the volume of women in one's life is easier said than done. Of course, it'd solve a lot of problems. Unfortunately, preaching "thy shall increase the number of women in your life" to the masses is just another way of saying "good luck" , it doesn't mean anything.

HOW exactly do you do that is the real question and has no one-liner. I don't believe it's a very striking idea, it is the first thing that comes to mind, yeah sure who couldn't use more women to experiment with ?

It seems like you are proposing to cold approach - but you'll probably admit that it is not enjoyable, nor convenient for all of us. I prefer something more productive than going to the same bars for 5 years straight just for the sake of meeting women.

Something must accumulate in the process as we interact with women, something like dancing, a skill that we can hone, and this is why Jophil has been telling us dunderheads to go join a dance club for years. (Well, personally I did) :yes:

Will anyone recognize me except the bartender in a college-bar after 5 years of heavy sarging? I don't think so ..
What about doing 5 years of Salsa? Well, even if you don't know anyone, yo will surely be the center of attention as soon as you start rolling. That's why I don't like cold approaching. It focuses too much on the approach, surrendering the frame from the start. The ultimate purpose is to win the woman. That's not entirely alpha. Women should be by-products in a man's journey; at all costs.

That is the wrong way of thinking. When I approach, I consider the interaction to be about meeting a new person and deciding if I want to spend more time with them. There have been numerous instances where I have approached a chick, and cut the conversation short and left. I knew she would give me the number if I asked, but I already had disqualified her. That is easier to do if you have more women in your life, like a previous poster said.

 

[Solomon]

Increasing the volume of women in one's life is easier said than done. Of course, it'd solve a lot of problems. Unfortunately, preaching "thy shall increase the number of women in your life" to the masses is just another way of saying "good luck" , it doesn't mean anything.
Have you tried it? if not it's easier to dimiss it. KNowing you have the option to approach any women you want, at virtually anytime is empowering not only that. But if a women flakes on me today I know I can go out and meet another one. Having the most options helps create a nature of abundance wherein being "indifferent is a by product. It means shyt tons if you have that mindset of abundance instead of scarcity
HOW exactly do you do that is the real question and has no one-liner. I don't believe it's a very striking idea, it is the first thing that comes to mind, yeah sure who couldn't use more women to experiment with ?
It's not easy trust me I know. However I've been on both ends. Where I didn't have a damn women to hang with and on the other end where I had women upset that I didn't spend "enough" time with them cause I was juggling so many. The thing that worked for me is literally approaching 30 women a night minimum for a good 2 months. This may not be the ideal but if you wanna have women in your life you have to meet them or be in places where they are. This is common sense so boo hoo yeah your gonna have to put in a little work unless you are in place where they fall in your lap
It seems like you are proposing to cold approach - but you'll probably admit that it is not enjoyable, nor convenient for all of us. I prefer something more productive than going to the same bars for 5 years straight just for the sake of meeting women.
I've done daygame too, although its not really my thing. if you don't enjoy approaching women then yeah you can sit behind a computer and do the online thing all day. And if your going to the bars just to meet women your already setting yourself up for failure. You should go to have fun first and enjoy yourself women should never be primary but secondary. I can always tell the difference between the guys having genuine fun to the guys just trying to get some tail. The guys having fun are surrounded by women usually while the guys trying to get some tail are clutching cold brews, eyeing chicks creepily from the wall as they dance
Something must accumulate in the process as we interact with women, something like dancing, a skill that we can hone, and this is why Jophil has been telling us dunderheads to go join a dance club for years. (Well, personally I did) :yes:
There is nothing more supplicating then doing a hobby just for the sake meeting women as a primary reason. If i enjoy photography which I do. Would I join a class just because of the tail? nope, but if there happens to be some you bet your britches I'll put my bid in but I refuse to do a hobby with the hopes of meeting women even as a secondary. It's like guys who go to the gym. You ever noticed them? their there for 3 hours, when they could be done in 1. Their too busy trying to talk to every chick. Sure when I work out one of the reasons is for women to notice my physique but while I'm at the gym I'm all "business"
Will anyone recognize me except the bartender in a college-bar after 5 years of heavy sarging? I don't think so ..
What about doing 5 years of Salsa? Well, even if you don't know anyone, yo will surely be the center of attention as soon as you start rolling. That's why I don't like cold approaching. It focuses too much on the approach, surrendering the frame from the start. The ultimate purpose is to win the woman. That's not entirely alpha. Women should be by-products in a man's journey; at all costs.

Your looking at cold approaching as a chore I look at as a quest or an adventure. You will rarely see me "cold approach" women as a main goal, it takes the fun out of it. This is one of the reasons I didn't like doing daygame. I wasn't out just having fun or doing things to be on my way, I was going specifically to meet women..

The biggest problem is lot of guys think like you do, that the quest and journey is to "win". If I'm the prize then ultimately I'm to be won. But realistically speaking. What you type'd at the end reeks of outcome dependence and that's the reason why 90% of guys fail at cold approaching. The whole mindset that "I gotta score tonight" or "get a number". When it should be all about having fun with your mates at the bar and enjoying each others company and have a drink.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7hgnu7kcPg
^^this basically is true, nights were I have gone out "looking" for women were the nights I did horrible in terms of gaming, nights were I went out and focused on myself or friends were the nights were I made epic memories

peace