Disqualifications — false or genuine — are a powerful pickup tool. Pulling the rug out from under a girl who autonomically believes you desire her is a lickety-split way to raise your status vis a vis her status, and thus delight her hypergamous reflex. The fact is, women are constantly in a disqualification state of mind: she glides through the masses of maledom programmed to disqualify as many suitors as possible, and to settle upon the one man who is the best of all the men she can attract with her looks and youth.
Knowing this, the appropriation by the pickup artist of the female prerogative to disqualify is a classic example of flipping the seduction script and deviously moving the woman into the chaser role, where she is more likely to perceive you as higher status and sexually desirable. Psych 101 and various books on influencing friends and clients touches upon this stuff, but of course the estimable textbooks don’t follow the logic down the crimson road of poon hunting.
There are four primary types of disqualification. Briefly, I will describe them here, before tackling the subject of this post’s title.
1. Preemptive self-disqualification
Introduced by Mystery, this is a statement you make to a girl that lets her know, in so many words, that you aren’t a serious prospect. You do this by disqualifying yourself. Examples: “I’m gay”, “I’m in a relationship”, “I’m not interested in dating at this point in my life”, “I have the AIDS”, “I poop myself during scary scenes in movies”, “I’m a male feminist”.
This type of DQ (disqualification — I don’t feel like typing the whole word out because my pinky finger isn’t working, fuck you acronym haters) is called “preemptive” because it short circuits a girl’s hypergamous instinct by robbing her of the opportunity to disqualify you first. It essentially reverses the chaser-chased dynamic, and upturns millions of years of evolutionarily molded female expectation. All of this works on the subconscious level. In the heat and fury of a real live social interaction, these game tactics fly under a girl’s conscious radar, barely perceived by anyone but her omnipresent war room hamster and the hotline the fevered critter has to the gina general at the front.
The preemptive self-DQ is intended to act as a bitch shield runaround: a girl is less likely to blow you out if you make her think you’re not available to her in the first place.
2. Target disqualification
Self-explanatory, this is a tactic whereby the man disqualifies the girl from being a serious mating prospect. Owing to the greater chance that Target DQ can be perceived by the woman as sour grapes, this is a more aggressive, and thus riskier, form of DQ, its risk weighed against a potentially more rewarding payoff. Examples: “You seem like you’d make a great friend”, “You’re not really my type”, “You’re a good girl, I’m nothing but trouble… we would never work”, “I’m glad you’re off the market” [just assume she’s off the market], “Phew, so nice to talk to a girl who isn’t trying to flirt with me”, “Since your vagina is cemented shut by a rare disease, I can talk to you like you’re one of the guys”, “You’re the first lesbian I’ve met in this town”.
The Target DQ is less about lowering a woman’s bitch shield than it is about instigating a woman to qualify herself to you. It’s a more proactive DQ compared to the PSDQ above, serving as it does as an immediate status differential cue to the woman that she has to do something to correct the imbalance to the natural order of things. This “something” usually involves convincing you, the incorrigible player, that she is hot and sexy and goodtogo. PSDQs are female disqualification — aka rejection — avoiders or neutralizers, while TDQs are meant to coax women into self-qualifying.
3. Handicap Principle self-disqualification
This is a sub-genre of vulnerability game, and promoted by Charisma Arts (A Wayne Elise aka Juggler production). Basically, you bring up some faux embarrassing thing about yourself — some minor personality flaw that you blow up into significance — and reveal it to the girl. The theory behind the Handicap Principle is that women perceive men who are comfortable “handicapping” themselves — either through bright plumage (peacocking) or through admission of beta characteristics — as alpha males, because who else but an alpha male would be strong and powerful enough to shoulder a weak beta flaw without suffering any hit to his overall status?
Be careful with the Handicap Principle. First, it’s a theory, an elegant one to be sure, but one that remains, as far as I know, largely unproven by evolutionary biologists. The degree to which HP might apply to humans is unknown. At some great enough level of flaw possession, the Handicap Principle must surely break down, and we see evidence for this in the many stories of alpha males who became beta in relationships and then lost their women’s love. Personally, I think the Handicap Principle is easily confused with the theory of sexual selection, but that is a topic for a future post.
Nonetheless, it is true that women coo for the alpha male who unloads a perfectly timed admission of (cute) self-abnegation. Examples: “Oh man, I’m so bad at figuring out if women are flirting with me or not”, “I don’t dance, I’ve got two left feet”, “Ever since an unfortunate childhood trauma, I’ve had a fear of puppies”, “Black people scare me”.
The trick is to admit your “flaws” with utmost confidence and unconcern. Don’t say them as if you’re waiting to judge her reaction. They should be spoken off-the-cuff, almost as if you’re unaware that there is a girl standing there listening to you. NEVER admit to a real beta flaw that would repulse most women; i.e. “I go limp when a woman makes more money than I do”.
4. Beta bait disqualification
Another Juggler specialty, the idea behind the BBDQ is to disqualify yourself as a sucker for women’s flirtations. This is a minor school of DQ that you probably won’t use or need very often, but when you do use it, its power is undeniable. Women will very frequently try to “tease out” beta males by complimenting men and judging them on their reactions. Does the man express a little too much appreciation for her compliment? BETA. Does he seize upon her compliment as a springboard to ask her out? BETA. Does he say “Wow, no girl has ever said something so kind to me before!”? BETA.
But if a woman compliments you, and your reaction is to ignore it, downplay it, or even disagree with her (without veering into self-deprecation territory), she will think ALPHA. Examples: “Thanks, but this actually isn’t my favorite shirt”, “You like these shoes? You’re easy to please”, “Yes, that bulge is my penis. Now you’ve made me self-conscious”.
The BBDQ is both a self-disqualification and a target disqualification. You deny the woman’s positive assessment of you, while simultaneously denying her power over your emotions. It is a very subtle art form that, when mastered, is chick crack to women’s status discernment modules. A successful BBDQ is only superficially a signal of modesty; underneath the calculated modesty is a heat-seeking missile aimed straight at a woman’s id heart that explodes in a fireball of lust for your total lack of interest in winning her approval.
***
DQs are one of the most difficult game techniques for noobs to grasp. They are tangentially related to negs, and like the neg, they are often abused and misused by beginners. Their power is also their danger; because they work so well, men new to the game have a tendency to throw them out at awkward moments, and with too much expectant fervor. They then come across as creeps and try-hards, and wind up providing fodder to bitches to later log into the social media borg to mock the hapless betas who tried to run game on them.
(Leave it to a woman to mock a man for trying. You don’t hear too many men mocking fat chicks who make a real effort to lose weight by going to the gym and eating right. But then, in some respects, men simply have more compassion and empathy than do women for the opposite sex. But I ingest.)
The keys to getting your DQ money’s worth are timing, context and delivery. Too soon –> weird. Too late –> spiteful. Too unrelated — > try-hard. Too forced –> creepy. Too self-deprecating –> beta. Too nasty –> sour grapes.
But even when you have timing, context and delivery down pat, you will sometimes get your DQ called out by a woman.
You: “I’m not looking for anyone right now.”
Girl: “Good, because neither am I.”
***
You: “You’re a good girl, I’m trouble… we would never work out.”
Girl: “Yeah, I guess I am a good girl.”
***
You: “I’ve got a weird fear of puppies. Goes back to a childhood incident.”
Girl: “That’s fucked up.”
***
You: “Thanks, but this isn’t my favorite shirt.”
Girl: “Yeah, now that I look at it closely, it’s not a very good shirt.”
Don’t worry. These kinds of reactions, as plausible as they are in writing, and as much as cunts will cackle that they will respond like this to players whenever one of them tries to hit on their skanky carcasses, are blessedly rare. Most girls will be too high on their torqued emotions to call out a player’s DQ bluff so directly. The hamster is simply not that rational; hence, why he’s called the rationalization hamster, devoted to creating rationale out of nothing at all.
But DQ bluff-calling does happen, and more often to newbs than to experienced PUAs. When a newb gets his DQ bluff called, the result can be hilarity (not to mention the newb’s demanding his money back from some overpriced pickup seminar he attended). A great illustration of a newb’s DQ bluff being called out was provided by Juggler in this post.
ASPIRING NOOB: “I could. But I’m not going to. I’m an all out there kinda guy. I’m going to this fab party later. If you’re lucky I might invite you.”
GIRL: “No thanks.”
“Aww. You’re playing hard to get. That’s so cute.”
“Whatever.”
“I hear an accent. Where are you from?”
“Nowhere.”
“Ha. Nowhere. That’s funny. Can I buy you a drink?”
“Yes. I’ll take a piña colada but don’t even think about dropping a roofie in there. I’m not going to hook up with you.”
“Whoever said anything about hooking up? You’re more of the kinda girl I see as a friend.”
“Good.”
“Good. So what’s your name?”
If a girl isn’t already invested in the conversation with you, a DQ is less likely to have the intended effect. If you walk up to a girl cold and start spouting off about how you just want to be friends with her and you aren’t available for dating, what kind of reaction do you think you’ll get? Do you imagine girls will start qualifying themselves to you on the spot? No, you have to first reel her in and dangle the promise of your interest before unloading the soul-sucking DQ.
Many PUAs, like Tyler Durden, recommend a preemptive approach to DQing; that is, you train yourself to sense when girls are about to disqualify you, and disqualify them before they get a chance. Often, this occurs during the late comfort stage of the seduction, when the girl is beginning to feel pangs of guilt about the release of her inner slut which looms on the horizon. Other PUAs, like Mystery, advocate active DQs early in the attraction phase, as a direct method for building attraction. Still others say to avoid them entirely, as the risk of delving into “sour grapism” territory is too great to assume.
I will say this about DQs:
They are supposed to sound spontaneous. The best DQs are unexpected and off-the-cuff. If it sounds like a line, it will backfire. If it sounds like you thought about it beforehand, it will backfire. Body language and facial expression are important conveyors of indifference and spontaneity.
Never DQ from a position of weakness. If you are working overtime to keep a girl’s attention, a DQ will only lower your value even more. Remember, DQs are FALSE disqualifications. When you DQ as a last resort to keep a girl around, it is no longer false; it is a real disqualification.
If a girl calls out your DQ, my best advice is to ignore it and change the subject, OR readily agree with her in return. A pinpoint DQ destroyer, while rare, is not to be trifled with. You want to avoid at all costs the impression of being flustered or annoyed or dispirited by her agreement with your DQ. Just roll with it, as if you’re glad she agreed with you, and reassess if she’s worth your continued effort to bed.
The upside to a failed DQ is that, later, if the girl is into you and starts to return your interest, you can remind her of the claim she made earlier about not wanting this to go anywhere. A pullback at a moment when the girl MOST WANTS TO PULL INTO YOU is like sticking TNT up her hamster’s anus. You are beginning down the road of building your own slave harem.
Preemptive DQs — the type of DQ that occurs before you have built adequate interest in the girl (think Mystery Method-style) — can work great IF you don’t linger on them waiting for a reaction. You drop the DQ, ignore whatever reply she gives in return, and plow. The goal is subconscious infiltration, leading to script flipping.
Mystery-style preemptive DQs work best on hot girls. Since hot girls are the most likely to assume every man wants them (justifiably), a quick correction to the contrary can temporarily scramble their status differential discernment algorithms.
Be careful about DQing 6s and 7s. You can easily blow a girl out of the water and render yourself unattainable to them.
If you’re going to agree with a girl’s DQ nuke, don’t make a production out of it. For example:
WRONG WAY TO AGREE WITH GIRL’S DQ NUKE
Girl: “Good. I just want to be friends too.”
You: “Yeah, yeah, friends. That’s what I want to.” [pained expression belies your words]
RIGHT WAY TO AGREE WITH GIRL’S DQ NUKE
Girl: “Good. I just want to be friends too.”
You: “Cool. So… you see that guy over there? I think he wants you. That’s the way to do it. Stare hard.”
In Juggler’s example above, when the NOOB says “If you’re lucky I might invite you”, he’s expecting the girl to reply something along the lines of “Wow, you must think you’re special”, a shit test to which the NOOB thinks he is well-trained to parry. But instead, she deflates him totally with the cold “No thanks”. The NOOB is now left flailing, hurling more DQs at her in hopes one will stick.
The best defense against the deflating DQ nuke is to simply avoid putting yourself in the position where such nukes are likely to happen. If you pace yourself, the likelihood of triggering a DQ nuke goes way down. Should one happen to you, one that is particularly disheartening, you may consider bailing.
You: “If you’re lucky I might invite you.”
Girl: “No thanks.”
You: “Ok. See ya.”
A good player knows when to cut his losses.
However, if you see an opening and want to continue working on her, AGREE AND REDIRECT.
You: “If you’re lucky I might invite you.”
Girl: “No thanks.”
You: “Yeah, come to think of it, it’s probably better you don’t come. My ex might start a fight with you.”
OR
You: “Well, I suppose now I can make room for my Mom to come with me.”
OR
You: [fake look of indignation] “Invite… REVOKED.”
OR
You: “Great, now who am I gonna set up my friend with?”
OR
You: “Damn, I guess I’ll have to buy my own drinks.”
This has been an introductory course in DQs and sidestepping DQ nukes. The subject material is advanced, so I encourage the commenters to flesh it out for the 1 billion readers who are hanging on your every word.
lmfao !
brilliant
You: “If you’re lucky I might invite you.”
Where did he come up with this line? Kindergarten? I would recommend never using this, because it sounds would-be arrogant, which women see as insecure — perhaps rightfully so.
A better line might be something like “Yeah it’s a party, but trust me you won’t want to go.”
This not only works as a disqualification but gets her in defensive mode: “Why would you say that?” Then you can take this in any direction. If she seems too good-girlish, you can go there or wherever.
One other thing. If you get a nasty rejection and you’re gonna walk anyway, might as well throw a bomb:
ASPIRING NOOB: “I could. But I’m not going to. I’m an all out there kinda guy. I’m going to this fab party later. If you’re lucky I might invite you.”
GIRL: “No thanks.”
OR
You: “I’ve got a weird fear of puppies. Goes back to a childhood incident.”
Girl: “That’s fucked up.”
RESPONSE: Wow, such compassion. I bet you’ll make a great mother someday with a heart like that.
Even if this doesn’t get you any further then, this response will bring out massive insecurity within even the most hardened of bitches, because no woman likes to think she’s unqualified to raise kids. The reason I know this works is because someone used it on a female friend of mine who had 50 shades of breakdowns afterwards. He didn’t get laid (IMO he got disgusted with her — she’s not all that hot anymore), but he definitely left an impression and she was waiting to talk to him again to “prove” him wrong. So there you have it: she now wants to qualify herself.
And if she engages you in a defensive argument, it’s easy enough to calmly explain that no one, male or female, really likes a bitch.
Yes! You wouldn’t want to go is such a good one, I’ve never not heard rightafter “why nottttttt?”
I like Krauser’s nuclear DQ which I recently used on a girl I was text gaming.
After a bunch of back and forth with her qualifying herself, sending photos etc and then saying I was too old too xx too yyy
I wrote: I’m not so sure about you anymore..
Her; Why?
Me: Three things
Her: What what?
Me: You’re cute and sexy in a weird way
Me: You are intriguing
Me; But I’m not sure I like you as a person
Her: What!??? Why??? You find me intriguing?
Her: Blah blah blah I’m nice this is just because I don’t know you blah blah blah
Thanks Krauser.
You think too much.
[heartiste: a hazard, to be sure, when in the company of dummies.]
^^^^^^ ha
I’ve heard this line from the likes of you Sam Vincente. I then usually hear “Just be yourself bro, you’re overthinking!”
Ha, shut the fuck up and get on your knees, hater.
Love this and the recent Juggler post. I’m here to get laid, not circle jerk about the pills I swallow and what color they are.
You’re “here” at a website “to get laid.” Problem number one. You think you mask the stink of beta ambition/desperation with Axe body spray? But leave that aside. Reconsider what motivates you in differing situations, and make your motivations congruent to the opportunity in front of you.
Another commenter: “You think too much.”
Just so it’s clear. You can’t get laid at a website. No matter what eHarmony claims in its ads. You can only exchange thoughts here. It is an environment designed for “much” “think[ing].”
You cannot hump your computer screen (comfortably). But you can communicate the words that design the circumstances where you can more easily “get laid.” In real vaginas. Part of that requires the patience to return to fundamentals. And fundamentals are not always directly applicable to techniques you can use tonight.
The world is not tailor-constructed around the needs of princesses like you and The Boy Who Thinks Too Little. Take what specifics are useful to your circumstances. Be man enough to discard or ignore the rest, rather than bitching and sighing about how awful it is to navigate past conversations that have no apparent utility for you.
Women are not much in evidence on this forum, but that’s not because they are intimidated from participating. Rather, they find the discussions of science distasteful, boring, repetitious, and/or superfluous. They like the sausage (heh), but they don’t like to see how it’s made. This website is where the alpha sausage is made. It is a butchershop reeking of blood and ground flesh, where omega scraps are shaped into tasty, glorious wieners. Stay away if the acrid stench of dying things gives you the vapors.
Have you ever heard women complain about nothing just to sate an urge to re-validate a perpetual right to complain? That’s you.
Matt
Have you ever heard women complain about nothing just to sate an urge to re-validate a perpetual right to complain? That’s you.
:*
God is a superstition, and King A (Matthew King) is a false prophet.
For fuck’s sake, King A. Must you ALWAYS respond to a reader’s post with some smug, arrogant, condescending drivel? Remember: what with your belief in a supernatural being who created mankind, you are fundamentally no different than the most ignorant, superstitious jungle savage who bows down to handmade idols and implores them to stop, or start, the rain.
That inescapable fact makes your arrogance, not to say your nauseatingly flaccid prose, a bit much to take.
Despite what you may think, you are not “Diogenes with his lamp,” doggedly pointing out the proper moral path to legions of misguided wanna-be PUA’s. Instead, you are the equivalent of a wild-eyed, long-haired subway masturbator wearing a placard which says “Repent now, sinners: the end is near.”
GBFM’s seemingly mindless comments always make perfect sense, and illustrate his point with wit and humor. Your comments, on the other hand, are the intellectual equivalent of a Happy Meal from McDonalds: superficially tasty, but actually completely valueless.
Please avoid commenting on matters above your intellectual pay grade, Matt.
I hear what you’re saying Tertullian. I actually appreciate King A putting down dickriding hater Sam Vincente so go easy on him. I actully enjoyed King As post.
King A, I do have a grievance. Although your verbose comments do make a good read, you do little in the way of offering actual advice or solutions.
For example, a couple posts ago here on CH, you and YaReally got into it and went back and forth yet in the end I was exhausted reading your shit. YaReally provides good solid insight and advice on pickup.
Don’t get me wrong, I think you are above the cut but please add value in the sense that for us aspiring to exit the realm of beta, simply reminding us of our rank and cutting us at the knees is not productive.
Give some practical advice as YaReally does or GTFO really. That’s why I think YaReally is superb with his comments, his input is a way to work our way out of our current predicament while you use big words to point and laugh.
I’m not trying to come at you dude but if you know so goddamn much why don’t you point us in a positive direction and try to make a change.
-I.G.
@ immoralgables: there’s a simple reason King A only offers insults and sarcasm, and never offers practical advice.
Ready for it?
Here it is.
King A knows nothing about Game, and has never picked up a woman in his life.
If you doubt me, just try and imagine an example of “King A game.”
Can’t do it, can you?
Ha, tis a shame Tertullian I actually enjoyed reading KingA’s shit until a few days ago when him and YaReally went head to head. It seemed that YaReally represented nurture and KingA smugly represented nature.
I will always side with the camp that believes they can improve through willpower and dedication, hands down. KingA’s musings are good but amount to intellectual masturbation.
Glad I’m not the only one who feels this way.
you know that advice that explains how it comes off as try-hard to invest more detail/effort into a response than the original statement? That should apply to non-seduction situations too.
Ive been called on these before. Generally the two types of girls who do it are ones who are very inexperienced with guys actually slick with their tongue, and girls who still aren’t sure if they’re down for you or not; the spark may or may not still be there.
In the latter case, In the past I usually just leave. Sometimes, if I’m really extra cocky, I’ll mention me meeting another girl, turn my back and walk away. This REALLY gets to some girls.
I know I could be missing out on prospects because of this – should I start continuing plowing through?
Once in a blue moon the girl will actually follow me or find me later, and I’ll get a lay out of it, but sometimes I don’t think it’s worth it – and other times I actually do feel spiteful and want to get back at her for not playing into my schemes
If its an inexperienced girl, I usually just wink at her and keep on going. These are the girls who actually can say “yeah, I actually am a good girl” and mean it.
In either of those cases, a girl’s agreement with your DQ could simply be her taking what you say at face value, rather than assuming there’s some trick and “calling it out”. No bitchiness intended, it’s more about responding sincerely (in the case of “fear of puppies”, my response would be more of an “ok….. that’s kinda weird….”, as you’d expect a reasonable person to respond to such a thing). Not that I can talk for all other girls who have responded in this manner under such circumstances, but at least under these circumstances, walking away would leave a girl quite offended and confused, rather than having the “compassion to the opposite sex” that you were talking about… Just something to consider.
RE: acronyms
Can we get one page glossary that defines the relevant acronyms? I’m all for saving strokes (in typing that is) but I sometimes get lost.
http://www.theattractionforums.com/new-start-here/156660-glossary-common-terms-acronyms.html
DQ = Dairy Queen. Chill and grill, bro.
BBDQ = is the division of a famous advertising firm that focuses on gay (“Q”) clientele
Ever have experience with chicks preemptively disqualifying other men while with you?
Sounds like people watching!! That’s great, you lean in and you and she bad mouth all the competition in the place. I think it establishes a false-rapport that can be used to your own ends.
Passing a shit test with a HDQ:
Her: So, you’re a fighter pilot?
Him: I’m living proof that even dumb farmboys can do it.
Nothing like a good, lengthy Heartiste post to occupy my blog-reading time.
Offtopic, but I did want to mention that the possibility for a Beta’s betahood is an endocrine disorder. For example, hyperparathyroidism causes psychological (and physical) effects via overproduction of parathyroid hormone causing hypercalcemia, effects such as depression and fatigue. Hypogonadism can be another endocrine issue which results is lowered testosterone, and obviously this has a feminizing effect.
People should be crosschecking endocrine diseases if they seem to have noticed a marked decline in ‘manliness’ over the course of a half-decade or so. Endocrine issues cause systemic problems…
http://parathyroid.com/parathyroid-symptoms.htm
Stop making excuses, nurture over nature.
Her: “Good. I just want to be friends too.”
You: “Cool. So we can just hang out sometime…?”
Her: “Sure.”
You: “…NAKED?”
That is more along the lines of the routine DNQ.
Just a note on Mystery VS Tyler and DQ timing differences. Mystery’s style tends to involve an entourage and generally standing out a ton from the start, whereas Tyler tends to just be him and a wing like any other dude the girl has seen.
Mystery’s giving off high value signals early on (peacocking showing he can handle social pressure, entourage of friends and pivots (female friends/wingmen) showing he has social proof, doing his magic tricks as DHVs etc) so it makes sense for him to DQ himself ASAP.
Tyler’s high value doesn’t come through as immediately because he’s pretty average at first glance and isn’t surrounded by people and PUAs strategically giving him props. Tyler’s value comes through over the course of the interaction as the girl shit-tests him and his frame and he demonstrates his value repeatedly. So for his style it makes sense to DQ later once the girl has seen his high value and is hooked.
Basically this boils down to the consistent principle of “you can’t disqualify yourself and have a girl chase you if you’re not high value to her.”
(there are nuances and exceptions to this but this is the jist for newbies to keep in mind)
I’ve always considered it that way.
Tyler gets laid with game, Mystery gets laid by a horde of followers.
Inb4 critique – I honestly think less of neither men for it.
At the end of the day, they’re sticking it into a juicy warm hole (or 2), no one but a sniveling beta or a female would think less of the method they get there.
[…] What to do if a girl call your Disqualification bluff – In-depth article by Chateau Heartiste about what to do if your DQ is called out Definition by Vince Lin […]
If you’re lucky I might invite you.
The only time to use that is if she’s engaged and there’s a bit of banter/playfulness going on. Use it to pique interest already demonstrated, not to create interest out of thin air.
What happened here, DQ’ed?
A younger girl I was trying to game told me about her professor coming by to confess his love after she caught him w/ someone else earlier that night. She knows my girlfriend and I have been friendly and flirty to this young girl for sometime. I then told her my current girlfriend and I were in a bit of love triangle ourselves and another girl was after me. I then tried for her phone # to talk and she said she wasn’t really comfortable with that and didn’t think that would be a good idea. I simply told her OK, I understand. What to do?
What happend here, DQ’ed
PS: I really thought I had developed a good rapport with this girl and had good conversations w/ her over a period of time. I was quite shocked when she would not even relent a phone #.
Don’t even sweat it bro move on.
I believe Roosh alluded to the principle that if you’re asking friends and forums on advice regarding a girl, odds are that it won’t work out since you have already invested more than she has.
@ DQ’ed
Maybe your current girlfriend frightened her off?
game only works when you have a good-looking face and money to spend. without neither, 100% of women will tell you to fuck off 100% of the time. still persistent? here come the police
Here is a related topic written last week by MRM chick Typhonblue:
http://www.genderratic.com/p/1673/how-a-limp-dick-can-save-the-worlduncut-version/
Quoting:
“Society (and when I say society, I’m talking in terms of a social organism that uses men and women like cells to perpetuate itself) Society controls men through rejection. Social and sexual. In particular, men are constantly told their sexuality is depraved, damaging, disturbing, and demonic. Men experience this social drumbeat of sexual rejection as continuous pain. It could be likened to a shock collar wrapped around the neck of every man that delivers a constant electrical shock, varied just enough so the man in question never gets used to it.
“The only time the shock collar stops delivering is when the man in question acquires approval from a woman. This approval can be social or sexual, but it is a woman who provides it.
“This system really only works when there is a constant flow of electricity to men’s shock collars. This flow is generated by holding men to an ideal of ever-ready sexual desire for women.”
Me again – the DQ by a PUA breaks the “shock collars” and indicates an out-of-a-woman’s-control man – something both terrifying and intriguing to women. Go, hamster, go.