Work on your GAME (Why I Don't Get "Rejected")

[SexPDX]

I came under some criticism in my Juggler FR for allegedly not being truthful about my "failiures" or "rejections". The reason is that the way I do things most of the time does not put girls in a position to do something to me that would be called a "rejection".

Conventional DJ wisdom dictates that rejection is something that WILL happen and something that should not affect us. That may be an okay frame to start with as a beginner but what I am going to tell you now is that rejection is something that should happen RARELY to NEVER. Let me explain...

Your goal is to have the woman try to seduce YOU. If your game (meaning or rapport and attraction skills) are working and the woman is someone you genuinely like then the woman WILL seduce you. In many cases she will do things like elicit your values and try to close you. These are the kind of things you need to get good enough in order to have happen. Not learning better ways to fast talk her out of a phone number. You can get as good as you want at that but the phone numbers you get will be useless.

In addition to what I wrote in my Juggler post, here are a few things you may find helpful...

SOI's

Someone asked me to clarify this in the other thread and I never got to it. An SOI is a "statement of intent". It lets her know you like her. Mainstream ASF school of though is wrong on this. You SHOULD let her know you like her. It's important for her to know that you are not going to snub or reject her if she makes advances.

At a "high-point" in the interaction say something like "I like you" or "I like the way you look at things". And actually go DDB on HER.

The reason ASF is not big on this is because the person who has influenced ASF more than any ONE PERSON is Mystery whose method is based on PUing superficial women in highly-charged social situations where his main leverage is his ability to cultivate feelings of perssure on the woman's part to gain his approval because her peer group approves of him. I am not an MMer, but I can see how it may not always be best to let her know you like her under this MO.

With most normal women in most normal PU situations however, the woman DOES want to know that you like her.

Closing

Guys, just say "I want to see you again" or "I want to spend some time with you". If you are not in a position of rapport and attraction to be able to say those things and be comfortable in doing so then you are not there and this is a phone number or a meeting that you don't want because it's not likely to go anywhere.

You may have been told "this is a number's game". I was told that too when I first got into the game and that is WRONG. It's only a numbers for guys who have NO GAME and are not interested in working on their game.

Work on your rapport and attraction skills. There is nothing else to work on. If you can get good at THAT then everything else there is to the game is a no-brainer. Frame your interactions so that SHE is expected to sarge YOU. That way there is NO REJECTION.

-PDX

 

[fragmentor]

DDB?

 

[SexPDX]

Originally posted by fragmentor
DDB?

DDB = Doggy Dinner Bowl look.

It is what Ross calls a really good reaction to pattern but I was turning it around to mean that you should react enthusiastically to HER.

-PDX

 

[copeland]

Of course the main aim when hitting on women is to increase their attraction towards you before number closing. That's a no-brainer and no one is arguing with that. Have them seduce YOU? It sounds good in theory but what does it actually mean and how can you tell when it's happening?

 

[SexPDX]

Originally posted by copeland
Of course the main aim when hitting on women is to increase their attraction towards you before number closing. That's a no-brainer and no one is arguing with that.

Nobody is ARGUING with it but many don't seem to understand it.

Originally posted by copeland
Have them seduce YOU? It sounds good in theory but what does it actually mean and how can you tell when it's happening?

You can pretty much tell when a gril is into you and expressing that she is, can't you? That might be a topic that needs to be discussed sepatately.

The reason I talked about giving her SOI's in this thread was that doing that (delivered correctly) will put girls at ease about expresssing their interest in you. I'll discuss this more when I have more time.

-PDX

 

[icepick]

(Note: Got caught up in my typing, didn't mean to write THIS much...anyway,)

Originally posted by SexPDX
The reason is that the way I do things most of the time does not put girls in a position to do something to me that would be called a "rejection". ... Your goal is to have the woman try to seduce YOU.

Yes! You should be able to tell whether or not she wants to 'party'. The request for the 'number' or the escalation of 'sexuality' should not be something that just appears out of the blue. It should be something that she was WAITING FOR! You have to let her use her 'feminine wiles' to seduce you! For that is the true way of nature. (And the ultimate booster to the ego of women! )

The insecurities of the AFC do not let him realize that 'most' women are 'ready to party'. He assigns god-like qualities and immesurable virtues to every HB. The woman, to him, is almost like God...she is judging him...and chooses whether he goes to heaven (pu$$y) or hell (rejection.) The 'game' eludes him, for he is focused on her reactions. He does not realize that it is a dance, therefore he cannot perform the steps. Both sexes must play thier parts.

Someone tells him it is a numbers game. So he goes out there and plows through many girls, some are accepting of his 'out of the blue' requests.

But he has not changed at all, he still has those insecurites, those flaws of character.

The woman--provided she is what he wants and he did not 'settle'--still has to 'hold his hand'. She has to cajole him into kissing her, she has to force him to open up to her, she has to ask him to try new things in bed, (for he still thinks that he is LUCKY to be with her, like she is some sort of ACCOMPLISHMENT--so he is AFRAID to scare her away) she still has to 'persuade' him to better his life (because he is focused on his own pleasure and ego boosting, and she provides MOST of it.) (Note: Believe me! I was THERE!)

But, for those of us who refused to belive that it is a 'numbers game' there is something better. We work on our social skills, we work on our 'sexy' conversatioin, we work on OURSELVES. We learn how to dance. A rejection does not become a "No." a rejection now becomes any bad reaction, any reaction that belies her unwillingness to scale up the sexuality. A big thing to learn is that 'getting women' is not an accomplishment.

Would 'getting men' be an accomplishment for women?

"Well, no ice, women only get men because of thier looks!"

So, then only the HB9's and 10's get men?

"Well, no ice...most fit women are attractive. Any girl can even make SOME guy get infatuated over her. Ice, my 'oneitis' was a 6.5!"

EXACTLY!

Most guys are attractive to women also!

What is as unconcious and uncontrolable as nature? The reason that anyone does NOT get women is that they step on thier own feet, they take themselves out of the game.

Just learn the natural 'dance' and you will be in. This problem does not only encompass guys. I knew a very pretty girl in HS (fit, tan, loved to hang out, feminine, etc.) who did NOT have a boyfriend. She was insecure about it too. She thought that no guy would put up with her dancing, drinking, and smoking! (As if!) We tried to tell her that it did not matter, but she wouldn't listen. She blew off every guy that tried to get with her because, "He is just desperate...he doesn't really like me."

Sound familiar? One reason that I belive the 'nice guy' is unsuccsessful with women is that he thinks that sexuality is 'degrading' to them. Nothing could be further from the truth!

Back in the (AFC) days, I tried to 'ignore' my "oneitis" one day (treat her like a guy.) Now I liked this chick alot but I did not know what to do! (It seems so stupid now, I was waiting for her to 'ask me out'...I was spoiled in my teens )

Anyway, when I was 'ignoring' her, she COULD NOT TAKE IT. She walked back and forth in front of my line of sight, stroking her hair, trying to draw attention to her body, etc. (Sucked me right back in!) (Note: I found out later--after DJB--that she actually did want a pice of the icepick. She would try to start conversations with me, she was nervous and laughed at everything I would say, when I looked at her she would forget her train of thought, etc. )

Women try to get in, AFCs just (unwittingly) shut the door. They do not know the steps of the dance. Hell, they do not even know that it is a dance, to them, it is just...a consuming pleasure.

Women are not the GOAL anymore (how the %&*# did they ever become the goal anyway, why is our society like that?) they are a RESULT of living our life the way we were SUPPOSED TO.

 

[copeland]

“The insecurities of the AFC do not let him realize that 'most' women are 'ready to party'. He assigns god-like qualities and immesurable virtues to every HB.”

It’s not about the ability to realize that the woman is interested; it’s about the ability to get her to a point to where she is consciously (or unconsciously) trying to show you that she is interested. And when she is at this point, she is said to be seducing YOU. Now if she seducing you is defined as her simply showing signs of interest both verbal and non-verbal, then there really is no such thing as her seducing you. YOU are the one who is basically seducing her. So there would be no need for this over-analyzation. Keep it simple.

 

[SexPDX]

Originally posted by copeland
“The insecurities of the AFC do not let him realize that 'most' women are 'ready to party'. He assigns god-like qualities and immesurable virtues to every HB.”

It’s not about the ability to realize that the woman is interested; it’s about the ability to get her to a point to where she is consciously (or unconsciously) trying to show you that she is interested. And when she is at this point, she is said to be seducing YOU. Now if she seducing you is defined as her simply showing signs of interest both verbal and non-verbal, then there really is no such thing as her seducing you. YOU are the one who is basically seducing her. So there would be no need for this over-analyzation. Keep it simple.

I think YOU are the one who is overanalyzing.

-PDX

 

[copeland]

A certain amount of analyzation is inevitable in seduction. There’s a thin line between productive analyzation and too much analyzation (which is unproductive). The key is not to analyze too much. Step back once in awhile and look at the big picture. Put things in perspective. It seems like you’re getting too deep into the specifics of seduction and it’s destroying you everyday. Make more of an effort to coalesce different things you do learn and simplify aspects that seem too detailed.

 

[SexPDX]

Originally posted by copeland
A certain amount of analyzation is inevitable in seduction. There’s a thin line between productive analyzation and too much analyzation (which is unproductive). The key is not to analyze too much. Step back once in awhile and look at the big picture. Put things in perspective. It seems like you’re getting too deep into the specifics of seduction and it’s destroying you everyday. Make more of an effort to coalesce different things you do learn and simplify aspects that seem too detailed.

Copeland, it would be interesting to hear you articulate what was so overanalytical about what I wrote here. It is not a complex concept, nor is it hard to understand.

All I am trying to point out is that guys should make seduction into a cooperative effort, which means that the woman should be seducing YOU and I discussed SOI's as a way of putting the woman at ease about expressing her interest in you.

In response to which you made a distinction between her expressing an interest and her actually trying to seduce you which I didn't see as germain to the discussion I had in mind originally, but I suppose it's a useful topic.

If you believe this post demonstrates overanalysis, my first take is to say that you misunderstood the post.

-PDX

 

[jbbrain]

The point is not to care (hence where all the over analyzing stems from) what she's thinking or whether or not you "should" make a move, but rather to be honest with your desires (as a man) and WHAT YOU WANT and make your move based on your HONESTY with yourself.

She'll respect you for it.

 

[Luscious]

Quick question for SexPDX

Originally posted by SexPDX

SOI's

Someone asked me to clarify this in the other thread and I never got to it. An SOI is a "statement of intent". It lets her know you like her. Mainstream ASF school of though is wrong on this. You SHOULD let her know you like her. It's important for her to know that you are not going to snub or reject her if she makes advances.

At a "high-point" in the interaction say something like "I like you" or "I like the way you look at things". And actually go DDB on HER.

I generally agree with this post, but I could use some clarification on SOIs.

In my limited study of SS, I never studied SOIs in depth, but your take on them is puzzling.

If we come right out with something like "I like you", doesn't that torpedo our mystery/challenge right there? I must be missing something here, but from what I've read and will unabashedly admit, when I came out and said stuff like "I like you" and the such in the past, the sarging just went downhill from there.

I can see the purpose of opening up the door for HER to sarge YOU by giving her a green light with an SOI, but could you clarify on how this avoids blowing your challenge/mystery?

Thanks a lot.

 

[Survivor]

Great Topic!

I comes down to learning how to properly influence the transition of a conversation.

What I got out of the post is that INTERPERSONAL SKILLS ARE PARAMOUNT; learning to guide social interactions is an art form developed only through personal experience and not theoreticals.

In the beginning what helped me get out of my social phobia was forcing myself to take every opportunity to socially interact with people, whether it be work, school, parties, etc. If there was a happy hour going on at some nightclub, I'd force myself to go. If a party was goin on, I'd be there. I even stooped so low as to do Internet dating just to bolster my level of experience. I did/do volunteer work, started a dismal failure of a business, joined a fraternity... anything that would get me interacting with people, I forced myself to do it.

I'm not a master conversationalist yet, but I'm making progress.

Recently, I emceed a company luncheon in which I had to speak in front of hundreds of engineers and executives and introduced the company VP; from which got alot of positive responses. I think I might take public speaking up as a new hobby. Its a big confidence booster.

Beforehand, I would avoid social interactions out of fear of rejection. However, as my "game" improves, I have come to realize just how self-imposed of a phenomena rejection truly is. Upon the initial encounter, when I project a confident and self-respecting image and demanor, then let the other person know that I approve of their image, I'm most likely to have an enjoyable and productive conversation with that person.

I wish I could give specific universal steps to create the "rapport and attraction" PDX was stating, but I don't believe there are any. The key is developing social skills that fit your own style and personality. My game is not your game.

SexPDX, I'm interested in knowing what steps you personally took to develop your own "rapport and attraction skills".

 

[SexPDX]

Re: Quick question for SexPDX

Good questions, Luscious.

Originally posted by Luscious
I generally agree with this post, but I could use some clarification on SOIs.

In my limited study of SS, I never studied SOIs in depth, but your take on them is puzzling.

Just to clarify, SOI's, in the way I am talking about them are not a SS thing.

Originally posted by Luscious

I must be missing something here, but from what I've read and will unabashedly admit, when I came out and said stuff like "I like you" and the such in the past, the sarging just went downhill from there.

Most likely your problem was wrong timing and delivery. SOI's are not things you throw around to fill lulls in the conversation, they have to be well-placed.

Let's say you are sarging a girl you just met on a park bench and during a lull in the conversation you say out of nowhere "I like you". That's pretty gomer-looking, isn't it?

As I said in my Juggler workshop report, anything that is a step FORWARD you want to do at a "high-point" in the interaction. Consider an SOI a BIG step forward in the interaction.

Here is an example of how it might work...

You are on the bench having a conversation and a flock of geese flies by and makes a bunch of noise.

YOU: "It is amazing this time of year that at the same time of day around here flocks of geese seem to fly around making a bunch of noise."

Let's say she takes that statement and runs with it and says...

HER: "OMG. I TOTALLY know what you mean.....(yadda yadda yackidy shmackidy)..."

She goes on to tell a story about something to do with geese and then she giggles at the end of it, nothing huge, just a giggle. Since there was some rapport and enthusiasm that came through at this time this is a good time to say...

YOU: "I am Luscious." Extend hand.

Introducing yourself should be done at this kind of "high-point". Many guys introduce themselves when there is a lull and that is WEAK, WEAK, WEAK. Get your name in at a high-point, not a lull.

The next move forward would be to get your hips closer together and that's usually something you can do at another high-point OR if you are trying to hear something she is saying you would avoid hen-pecking and instead use that as an opportunity to close the distance.

Now you want to let her know you like her (SOI).

Find a REALLY enthusiastic highpoint, for this one like...

YOU: "What WAS the name of that Styx song with that crazy video? Hmmmm......oh yeah!!! ROBOTO. That was it!!! It was ROBOTO!!!

Both of you are laughing and you high-five each other. Hold onto her hand for just a moment, squeeze lightly and see if she squeezes back. If she does squeeze back that's good IOI but don't read too much into it if she doesn't. Then say "I like you". Say it sincerely but don't get mushy about it. Just look her in the eye and confidently say it. Also don't hang there afterwards as if you NEED her to respond to that, that will just come across as looking to her for approval as to whether or not it's OKAY for you to like her. You don't need her approval, you said it, you meant it, and you are not going to apollogize for it.

Originally posted by Luscious
could you clarify on how this avoids blowing your challenge/mystery?

There are a few things you need to understand about challenge and mystery the way those two concepts are represented on THIS FORUM.

The ideas of challenge and mystery represented here are those of Doc Love. I personally recommend forgetting everything you ever learned about mystery or challenge from either Doc Love or Anti-Dump. Neither of those guys (assuming they are in fact different people which has come under question in the past) have anything to say about cultivating feelings of attraction mostly because they did not acknowledge that it is even possible to do so.

To these guys, attraction is something that comes out of thin air and your game and overall attraction skill set and experience has nothing to do with the probability that a woman will be attracted to you.

Now I am sure there ARE guys who have GF's and wives that they attracted with a lower-level skill set, who never worked much at their game who in fact ARE very happy with their relationships they have now but either way it falls far short of what I am encouraging guys to do.

Doc Love's advice to have the woman do most of the talking under the justification that it perserves the guy's "mystery" actually has nothing to do with mystery at all. The fact is that because Doc Love's target market has no game and is not focused on developing any, this puts them in a better position than they may have been in before. It has jack to do with "mystery" which BTW is not the end all and be all of attraction under ANY frame.

Being a "challenge" is probably the single most useful piece of advice Doc Love has but many guys misunderstand it. I am going to make an INCREDIBLY BOLD CLAIM here and say that most guys who by Doc Love's System are not very confident in their ability to attract women. Guys who lack confidence in their desirability communicate that lack of confidence in what we recognize as things that make them look desparate. Being a challenge is a way for guys with lower-level confidence in their desirability to mimic what they think are the behaviors of a man that has women chasing him all over the place. Not necessarily a bad idea but while you are at it it might be nice to develop some qualities women GENUINELY find attractive.

But letting a woman know you like her doesn't mean that you are her slave the moment you say it to her. Deliver it the way I recommended in this post and you will not communicate ANY lack of confidence in your desirability the way you probably did when you did it in the past.

I hope you understand after reading this post the difference between guys like Doc Love and Anti-Dump and guys like SexPDX. THEY are trying to get you to where you can cope with having no game by faking the behaviors of a desirable man, WE are encouraging you to develop the underlying skills of interaction that actually MAKE a desirable man.

Do you see the difference? Women do.

-PDX

 

[copeland]

“Nobody is ARGUING with it but many don't seem to understand it.”-PDX

What’s so hard to understand about it? It’s simple, the most common method is to go up to the girl, have a conversation focused on increasing the attraction and then do some form of closing. Just because there may be people posting about their number closes without specifically stating that they tried to increase the woman’s attraction to their greatest ability, does not mean they don’t understand that that is what they should be doing. Even the most ‘unschooled’ afc knows and can understand this. And this is why I termed that argument as a no-brainer.

“You can pretty much tell when a gril is into you and expressing that she is, can't you? That might be a topic that needs to be discussed sepatately.”-PDX

Yes I can, it’s not that difficult. Your suggestion of discussing this topic and its nuances further is characteristic of your tendency to analyze too much. It’s overkill nick. It will not increase your game in any way. It’s simply a product of your game. Isn’t this thread about emphasizing the focus on one’s game?

“The reason I talked about giving her SOI's in this thread was that doing that (delivered correctly) will put girls at ease about expresssing their interest in you.”

I understand the reasoning behind that, but you’re just looking for one of those “better ways to fast talk her out of a phone number” techniques. As you said yourself, “You can get as good as you want at that but the phone numbers you get will be useless.”

You’re assuming that if you don’t straight out express your interest in the girl, she will not express interest in you. This is wrong. Women can pickup your subtle SOI signals by the way you talk to them i.e. attitude, flirting, conversation. Women are not stupid. As they pickup these clues, they gradually ease themselves into expression of interest in you. It’s not something that happens instantly (holding the variable of physical attraction constant) at a ‘high point’ in conversation.

“I came under some criticism in my Juggler FR for allegedly not being truthful about my "failiures" or "rejections".”-pdx

Now I know “rejection” may be a touchy subject for you, so I’ll stick to the point. My take of it is that there are different levels of rejection. You may have not experienced out right rejection but you surely did encounter women who, although they may have spoken with you out of courtesy, were not interested in you (again assuming your looks did not have an influence on her interest). What some may have wanted you to do in addition to talking about your successes was to include in your report the description of those situations where the woman’s interest was not at a level where she was seducing YOU. No one wants to shed negative light on you. Sometimes you can learn more from what doesn’t happen than what does happen.

 

[SexPDX]

Originally posted by copeland

What’s so hard to understand about it? It’s simple, the most common method is to go up to the girl, have a conversation focused on increasing the attraction and then do some form of closing. Just because there may be people posting about their number closes without specifically stating that they tried to increase the woman’s attraction to their greatest ability, does not mean they don’t understand that that is what they should be doing. Even the most ‘unschooled’ afc knows and can understand this. And this is why I termed that argument as a no-brainer.

If it's such a no-brainer that that should be the focus then why wouldn't you want to understand the process well enough to at least articulate it? I see very few guys doing so on this forum.

Originally posted by copeland
Yes I can, it’s not that difficult. Your suggestion of discussing this topic and its nuances further is characteristic of your tendency to analyze too much. It’s overkill nick. It will not increase your game in any way. It’s simply a product of your game. Isn’t this thread about emphasizing the focus on one’s game?

Copeland, our disagreement seems to be primarily about a semantic misunderstanding of what I meant when I said to cause a woman to seduce you. You asked how you can tell when that is happening. I questioned if you knew when a girl was into you. You argued that that was different from her seducing you. Maybe you are right but the only point I was making in saying "let her seduce you" was that the guy should not just be a guy trying to make something happen, the seduction should be a cooperative effort and that the guy should allow the woman the opportunity to engage in the process herself. Sometimes guys are so focused on THEIR end of the interaction that they lose sight of this.

It was not my intention to discuss the line between her expressing interest in you and an according-to-Oxford "seduction". You are assuming I am analyzing all this WAY more than I actually am. In fact, as I sit here I am putting WAY more analytical energy into my analysis of what it is you must think I am analyzing than I have put into ANY thought about the game in recent memory.

Did you read my LR in the Juggler post? Notice at the end she expressed her FIRM belief that it was HER who did the seducing even after I admitted to being a trained seductionist. THAT is what I am talking about right there.

Originally posted by copeland

What some may have wanted you to do in addition to talking about your successes was to include in your report the description of those situations where the woman’s interest was not at a level where she was seducing YOU. No one wants to shed negative light on you. Sometimes you can learn more from what doesn’t happen than what does happen.

Fair point. There is a lot to be learned from posting fvck up reports.

Just so everyone knows and/or remembers, I have posted many of reports of me having fvcked up BADLY in the past. Does everyone already forget the "bodybuilder neg" incident? Or how about back when I didn't know what a neg hit was because I had been listening to THIS FORUM instead of ASF to form my idea of what it was and I posted about how I made an FB of mine CRY because of something I THOUGHT was a neg hit because of this place and I posted "my neg hit made her cry". Amazing how some people still think I have something to hide even after I have met people from the community IRL, talked to people on the phone and gone to great lengths to be open about myself on the board.

BTW, Copeland, that wasn't necessarily directed at you specifically, your concerns were all reasonable.

The reason I have not posted many fvck ups lately is because lately I post very few FR's at all in any forums. It's tedious to write about a lot of sarges, whether they are successful or not. Remembering the details enough to make what I write worth posting is tiring. However, I do see your point. In the next week or so I will write up that situation where I got rejected HARD at the Juggler workshop when I decided to go Gunwitch and hopefully people can learn a few things from that.

-PDX

 

[SexPDX]

Originally posted by copeland
I understand the reasoning behind that, but you’re just looking for one of those “better ways to fast talk her out of a phone number” techniques.

I don't know where you got the impression that THAT was my focus but you are way off.

-PDX

 

[hardwork]

The Way I understand it...

Originally posted by Luscious
If we come right out with something like "I like you", doesn't that torpedo our mystery/challenge right there? I must be missing something here, but from what I've read and will unabashedly admit, when I came out and said stuff like "I like you" and the such in the past, the sarging just went downhill from there.

"I like you" isn't to say, "omg i luv u", it is to say, "Hey, you I like! You're not too bad a chum." It's not a mushy "I like you" thing, it's an open one.

Try thinking of it like laughing at a stand-up comic after having seen a hundred others: "Hey, I like this one!"

 

[SexPDX]

Re: Great Topic!

Good to hear from you, Survivor! I love that veterans like you still follow my stuff.

Originally posted by Survivor
SexPDX, I'm interested in knowing what steps you personally took to develop your own "rapport and attraction skills".

I have been working on it for a long time, and I have pretty much left a paper trail for you guys in my posts. I have been big on social experimentation, got big into SS and NLP for a while. I spent a HELL of a lot of time in the field and most recently I took a Juggler workshop and I posted most of what I learned from that.

Like you hinted at in your own post, you have to find your own way. But no matter what way you take, you HAVE to be out there.

-PDX

 

[Doppler4000]

Re: Re: Great Topic!

Originally posted by SexPDX
I have been working on it for a long time, and I have pretty much left a paper trail for you guys in my posts. I have been big on social experimentation, got big into SS and NLP for a while. I spent a HELL of a lot of time in the field and most recently I took a Juggler workshop and I posted most of what I learned from that.

SexPDX- It's interesting to watch your experiences and opinions change over time in going from the SS stuff (some of which is fine, some of which is so rediculous it's laughable, and some of which probably just works despite itself) to your latest "Juggler" type approach, which (whether you realize it or not) actually starts to come close to agreeing with some "academic" type psych studies. For instance, it's been proven that we like / are attracted to those who like us... and when you go ahead and express some interest / like in someone (or the things they are telling you about) that can be very effective if there's some seed of attraction from the beginning. This is contrary to what many self-declared "experts" will say, but real studies show it's true and you're not hurting yourself by doing it. Yeah, just don't declare your undying love for some chick after 10 minutes... but you understand what I'm saying. There's other examples in the stuff you've written recently, too. Keep it up and good luck.