šScienceš has once again dropped to its knees and slobbered the knob of CH, vindicating the Heartistian observation that women love laconic men.
For decades, experts believed women flocked to silent types because of their aloof and mysterious nature ā but new research suggests its because the trait is actually an ultimate sign of masculinity. […]
When a women meets a man who talks a lot, they consider them to be more feminine and less attractive, yet men who use shorter words and speak more concisely were seen as more attractive because they appeared more masculine.
Terse charm > loquacious charm > charmlessness. Gabby men are simply not very attractive to women. Men who keep their cards close and donāt wear their hearts on their sleeves are sexier to women. Men whose jokes are powerfully succinct rather than tiresomely pedantic are considered socially savvier. Brevity is the soul of wit and, apparently, the stroke of clits.
There are times when following the exception to this rule will be personally beneficial, but you should strive to express yourself more laconically, more pithily, as you work to craft your new sexy identity.
They found that people are naturally drawn to friends and colleagues with voices that sound familiar.
People prefer those who have a similar accent, intonation and tone of voice to themselves, for example.
Theoretically, group selection shouldnāt exist, but in practice thereās a lot of evidence for some sort of in-group favoritism motivating human interaction.
I just wonder if there are a couple outliers if youāre adept at weaving emotional language (think romance novels and the gabbers at RSD). Perhaps you can charm them glibly and then go a bit aloof so hamster wants a pellet.
RSD Nation? Havenāt looked at that in ages, whatās it like these days?
I guess what put me off with āPUAā stuff is calling adherents āartistsā without even joking; the idea that every man could become an expert by buying the material. The gurus are so obviously mercenary. But it couldnāt be any other way, once they do it as their full-time job; you donāt tell potential buyers āonly buy this if you are one of those who could actually make it workā. And of course, the material is essentially correct. Just not the one-two-three-success sales pitches.
marketing is inherently mendacious, because it has to be. otherwise people wouldnāt buy anything but the essentials for survival and whatever their neighbors are buying.
[ā¦] Study: Women Prefer Men Of Few Words [ā¦]
Yo this is in reply to Scray when he posted this comment a couple posts back: http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2014/05/14/amish-facebook/#comment-562596
āI dunno wtf this is. Isnāt trying to make rules for a chick beta? Is this a shit test? Iād love to just tell her what to do, but I donāt really know what the right play is.ā
I wanted to say that you need to choose a bit more leadership especially in laying down boundaries. I get what youāre trying to do by āwithdrawingā but even then I think youāre messing up the execution.
1) Withdrawing/being aloof because you have other things going on: DHV
2) Withdrawing/being aloof because you donāt have other things going on: DLV
Now youāre in a bit of a pickle because youāre dealing with an HB8 and you donāt want to express neediness by laying down the law and saying you donāt want her to go to event xyz.
But Scray, I believe it was you in the past who said that express however you feelā¦just do it from the right mindset.
The fact that youāre trying to not act needy is needy in-and-of-itself. Coincide this with the fact that this chick is your only right now and you may have a bad time down the road. My suggestion is that you either:
1) Act distant but be sure to have other things/chicks going on.
2) Enforce boundaries but donāt do it from a place of scarcity.
YOU GOT THIS
Iāll provide an example of the firstā¦.
The HB6.5/7 cutie Asian Iāve been seeing. She has a knack for not responding when Iām trying to firm up plans. Itās happened a couple times before.
Initially I would just wait until the next day and hit her with the ā?ā an she would reply immediately and apologize for how busy she was.
But 2 months in and she pulled something similar recently. Instead of getting angry or calling her out (wasnāt OK doing this) I went about it this way:
Me: [Confirming plans/logistics…leaving out details per YaReally’s advice.] Does that work for you?
**No response from her even though she was responding frequently up until that point.**
I go to a party that evening and eventually send this text 8 hours later after I had number-closed a Latina there and setup plans w/ the Latina for drinks later in the week. Wanted to send this from a position of strength:
Me: Hey cutie nvr heard back from u so i locked up other plans for tues. Will make it up to ya : )
– (2 hours later) –
Her: whaaa
Her: I said Tuesday was a go, no?
Her: So quick to move!
– (2 hours later) –
Her: ok. well lmk, Immoral : )
– (Next morning) –
Her: hi. ur not mad / annoyed r u
Me: Melissa wtf are u talking about
Her: lol ok. I realized my text could have been interpreted as a vague answer and that could be annoying
Her: Bc that has happened to me v recently and just wanted to make sure Her: well I am glad we r communicating [thumbs up emoji] will talk to u later : )
So yes. My schedule opened up that night and I was able to do xyz plans with her that night instead of the tues. It all worked out and she was intrigued as to what plans I had made in lieu of seeing her tues (āGoing out for drinks with friendsā) and trust that she was a lot more responsive to my texts and smitten when she was with me.
Hopefully that answers your conundrum. I think you have enough pull with your HB8 to lay down boundariesā¦make sure you have options, lifestyle, inner-game to back it up.
-IG
āThe fact that youāre trying to not act needy is needy in-and-of-itself. ā
For shure, man. Likeā¦.when Iām on the hunt, I get into a really good headspace. But when I get what I want, I justā¦.I dunno. Itās a combination of restlessness, fear, etc.
That txt exchange is boss tho.
Iām good at being tight for about likeā¦ā¦a month, and then shit just gets gay.
Ya, but going forward Iāll just have something to do.
This is probably the only time my personal experience flies in the exact opposite direction. My āchattyā friends seem to do better with women. Small sample size?
the dynamic goes something like this:
laconic men > chatty men > shy men.
chatty men do well with women because they bust a move when most men are silently sticking their hands in their pockets. but over time, laconic men likely evoke the most sexual attraction in women.
Speaking from experience I agree with this, 100% in the realms of initial attraction and seduction..
However, how does this translate into LTRs?
Once theyāve slowly peeled the laconic layers back, and earned your commitment etc, does longer more involved conversations kill or spike attraction in a girl in love?
Thereās the rub.
I became more verbose as my previous LTR dragged on, and regret it.
Iām more of an introvert ā by speaking more I entered her reality.
ā¦ by speaking more I entered her reality.
COTWā¦
This is what I keep trying to tell you clowns when you engage the hamsters on this very forum.
Wise old owl sitting on an oakā¦
The more he saw, the less he spokeā¦
The less he spoke, the more heād seeā¦
Wise old owl, sitting in his tree.
Nah, less is more IRLā¦not just texting. Chatty guys can do very well if theyre going on about the right thingsā¦otherwise its just annoying.
everybodyhatesscott, read a blog called A Dark Heart from 2012-2013. (Now ended ā he got a girlfriend, and he had said all he wanted to say anyway.) Highly interesting, by a guy who works part-time as a bartender, and who I know reads CH and other blogs. He speaks very much from experience. He has the āJames Bond styleā as he calls it, not talking too much. He finds that women listen to him more in a group when he has that style. (He also has washboard abs and knows how to play the game, so this is just one of the things he does.)
Dammit, the blog doesnāt show up when I go to the URL now. I know itās blank periodically, just hope he hasnāt taken it down for good. It is seriously some of the best reading in the manosphere.
āBrevity is the soul of wit and, apparently, the stroke of clits.ā Great line
I do not talk that much, but when I do I Focus on Tonality and make sure everyone can hear me, Speak from your BAllS men
There was a time when, believe it or not, I only watched Korean TV ( on internet) and almost never anything else, so I couldnāt relate to many people, I only talked about it, plus I stayed at my house most of the time and didnāt have any kind of gossip
You are Korean then, I take it; judging from the picture and your blogās name.
Honestly, there is some anime that I like, the more adult kind. It is like a fresh air to see something that doesnāt contain the assumptions you see in most Hollywood material. You have to know where to search to find the best, though. And itās sad when Western youth get hooked on that, almost as sad as when they get hooked on Hollywood stuff. Itās like they donāt know the wealth of real Western culture they could read up on. Pick up a Jack London novel, for example.
Itās like when people want music that is fast, and they pick hiphop because thatās all they know, thatās all they see around them. And they are unaware of what you can find in power metal.
Show us on the doll where your uncle touched you.
Nooo, I am a foreign fan and I meant I was obsessed with that stuff, in many places I was a man of fewer words, since my life was being inside a house hanging out on internet like watching Korean stuff, I even leave my TV, and only when my modem did broke I started to watch a little of non-Asian tv, if you knew the me at that time, ps and I am still waiting for some gay game ā¦
yeah, and if youāre white, the fewer f#cking words you say, the smaller target youāll be at a worthless college orientation this sh!t: http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/14/harvards-kennedy-school-will-make-white-privilege-training-mandatory-for-orientation/
Haah. True.
Women prefer the strong and silent type. Iāve always suspected it, so itās nice to see it vindicated,
Chatty men who talk too much and with robust, exaggerated expression and gestures come across as less masculine to me. Unfortunately, in certain industries and jobs, this type seems to predominate.
exaggerated expressions can be used to great effect by men during the attraction sage of seduction, as long as theyāre done with a veneer of comical self-awareness. chicks dig manufactured drama. but these early game tactics are like seasoning; too much and you spoil the whole dinner.
Also, somehow, Italian men are stereotyped as being that way, but also as being great with women.
I learned a long time ago, the best way to appeal to women is through actions rather than words. So rather than telling her what you are going to do, just do it. That is why I learned how to sky-dive in tandem ā nothing like throwing yourself out of an airplane at 15,000 feet and hurdling toward the ground at 150 mph to get her juices flowing.
Like the old adage goes ā women say, men do.. We can have a thousand studies to prove what everyone has known for years, and in general we do, and then people turn a blind eye to it, for a simple reason, it shows clearly that Men are MEN, and Women are WOMEN, and they arenāt the same ā end of discussionā¦ And Feminists and Liberals hate that simple truthā¦
I completely agree with this, which is why itās hard to understand how the Russell Brand type does well with women. But somehow they do.
Amy, Russell Brand is a very charismatic guy. He seems to be feminine in his psychology, (heās a liberal and cringingly spiritual in a atheist way(if that makes sense). I think he is endearing. A manly man? No way! He is more like a lost baby boy, who needs help kind of endearing.
I can certainly understand that women on the pill or with hormonal imbalances would find him attractive, though.
The handsome, manly men are obviously not always silent, but when they speak their words have gravity. It shows a certain wisdom, that a man is understanding that words are not always necessary.
For example, Rhett from Gone with the wind, he did not speak so much, in the movie his actions speak louder than his words. But when he DOES speak, it is powerful and manly, and does not lack gravity. Compare him to Russell Brand, who talks without even thinking, it seems. Babbling and mindless chatter is incredibly woman-like.
I can certainly understand that women on the pill or with hormonal imbalances would find him attractive, though.
This has, Iāve argued before, perhaps contributed to the increase in less manly males in recent decades, a result of women on the Pill seeking out and breeding with feminine men.
@ Laguna Beach Fogey. Yes, undoubtedly.
These unnatural things lead to unnatural preference, and what we are seeing in this generation, is very much the result of these unnatural preferences as result of artificial hormones in women, in my opinion!
Seriously, the whole manosphere and other places talk about the fall of women in the last decades, but women were controlled quite okay, before, yes? So what is in the water/ or the āpillā, to suddenly make this out of control? Something is going on, that is for sure. Even you men who are into āgameā have to modify it for different types of women these days, because the truth is, the preference of a village woman eating natural food, never having taken these synthetic hormones, is going to be drastically different to the preference of many city women, eating processed foods, and taking the pill since the onset of menses.
If the women pumped with these artificial hormones choose to mate, they are mating with the feminine men, going completely against nature, and in my opinion, greatly contributes to the downfall of a decent society. Just a theory. š
That Brand is a disgusting chatter box but what about men who know how to speak,who use the language and oratory skills as a weapon of mass seduction, who have the voice of devil that invites you to surrender fully, completely and with no restraint?
Or do you always prefer mute just because you wild imagination will make out it anything it desires?
āIt is better to remain silent at the risk of being thought a fool, than to talk and remove all doubt of it.ā
ā Maurice Switzer
Nice quote.
Brand is a chatter box, yes.
I just said in my last comment that the most important thing is that a man speaks with real gravity. The voice of the devil, uh oh, that sounds a bit weird and cheesy, really.
But for those men who speak well, and have CONFIDENCE in what they are speaking, why not? It is just that speaking without even coming up for air, tends to scream, āI am nervous, and trying to impress!ā . š .
He isnāt great with women. Just ask Katy Perry.
Preselection. Brand is well known (certainly in the UK gossip columns) for having had a lot of beautiful women. That just ups his appeal for women.
āYouāve had lots of lovely women
Now you turn your gaze to me
Weighing the beauty and the imperfection
To see if Iām worthyā
as Joni Mitchell sang (her lyrics are very honest and very CH).
āwhich is why itās hard to understand how the Russell Brand type does well with women. But somehow they do.ā
Very simple, this blog has sample size issues. Not everyone is the same. Russel brand is your cool friend that everyone liked from highschool. No feminine bullshit about it.
The reality is sites like this blog and the manosphere in general look at the world of human relationships through distorted lenses.
People are human beings, Iāve connected to girls over deep conversations about bad awful things. Attraction is bout finding similarities and making connections, you can attract people through various means: Physically, or through common interests/meeting of minds.
Many manosphere blogs are run by people of average intelligence and who have serious social deficits so their views tend to be skewed.
Yes exactly. Women do prefer the silent type, talkative men are quite irritating and woman-like.
Yep.
LOL Thread winner!
I ate dinner recently with a girl who is pretty introverted. When we have conversations, we tease each other and the interactions go pretty well (she mimics my body language and facial expressions).
Iām usually initiating the conversation and she keep it going. However, sometimes I just stay silent and donāt say anything and she looks like she wants me to initiate conversation again. At times she asks āWhat are you thinking?āā¦
Should I be more laconic even though she seems to enjoy when I talk more? Or does me being silent help me because it changes up the pace?
This is where you break out a CH classicā¦. āIām thinking whether it would be better to be reincarnated as a cat or dogā¦ā Used it once during a lull in pillow talk, she had a good laugh and didnt ask me that shit again.
Okay, so how would one apply this to cold approach Daygame?
In the initial stages I find myself doing the majority of the gabā¦is it possible that this is more applicable to relationship game; I.e. after the first few tustles in the hay? By then youād have the right amount of āhand,ā Iād assume.
short answer: yes.
long answer: donāt get too hung up on your wordiness when you first approach a woman. talking a lot beats not talking at all, and when a girl is trying to figure you out, talking less than you should could backfire and make you seem weird. i suspect the study is most relevant to women who are already in some kind of dating relationship with a man.
In my opinion, it depends on the kind of woman you are trying to attract. Heartiste just said talking less than normal can make you seem like a weirdo, and yes that is very true. But normally only extroverted woman are going to feel that way. Introverted woman might prefer it, because if a man starts talking on and on and on to an introverted women, it can be very intimidating and annoying.
My opinion (of course you do not have to take it seriously, I am a woman), is that you should first try to understand if the woman is a crazy outgoing woman, or a quieter one. More quiet women tend to prefer the quiet, intellectual vibe. Louder women are probably going to love it when you just talk, and talk, and talk.
How can you understand if woman is quieter one or crazier? Well, first of all you can look at her clothing style, as a rule of thumb quieter women are going to be more neutral colored clothing, and louder women not so much. But as I understand, you men have a radar for that stuff. š
It is also depending on what you are looking for in a woman, if you want a serious woman to love, go for that quiet woman, and forget about all those mindless words.
More important, overall, than your words, is your attitude behind it. I guess what people in this circle call āframeā. A confident man with a strong masculine confidence, honestly can pull off either extroversion or introversion. What matters is the frame and virtue behind it. Sure, a talkative man can be a little irritating, as this posts explains, but your frame behind it could make it okay.
If you are an introvert man, go with that and build on it. If you are outgoing, build your approach to women on that. Your approach to women is going to be much better if it is built on the foundation of your true character and genuinity.
Gotcha
I agree with this assessment. You really have to sell yourself with day game, all the while making it appear that youāre not trying to sell yourself.
I talk very little and I tend to sound cynical half the time. It does attract female attention. However, a lot of women think I am trying to impress them when I am not. Being chatty can get you action only if you are extremely popular but from what I have seen guys that talk a lot and get women, get mediocre women at best. Not to mention if you are āeasy to talk toā you are just asking to be friend zoned.
It is important to note that in this study shortness means the time it takes you to say each word not the length of the word itself and all individuals read the same words so conciseness was not measured.
From the study itself:
āDuration: Males typically have shorter durations than females [46]. This was measured from the onset to offset of spectral energy for each word and averaged for each talker.ā
The only significant results this study had was:
āThis indicates that listeners were more likely to rate a male voice as attractive if it had lower F1 values for /i/ and /u/, suggesting a larger back cavity. Male voices were also rated as more attractive if their productions were on average shorter in duration.ā
or deeper sounding i and u and shorter word duration.
interesting. does this mean that men who speak with a staccato cadence are sexier than men who speak slowly or with a drawl? my impression is that slow speakers from the south are perceived as attractive by women. like bill clinton.
āmy impression is that slow speakers from the south are perceived as attractive by womenā
Yeeeeeeeeessss. A drawl makes a woman hang on your words.
Seems to be another respect in which Jewish men are seen as effeminate ā loquacious in a whiny tone.
lol no. This is the same as txt game.
Itās not that most women find laconic txt game more attractive, itās that most guys suck donkey dick at txt game so they fuck the seduction/attraction up less when theyāre laconic.
The less you say the less youāll fuck up if your game is shitty (and 99% of guysā game is shitty or actively anti-poon horrible), so ya, they should be laconic, because the more they say the more theyāll fuck it up.
If youāre saying the right shit you can attract with verbosity. On top of that, in a cold approach situ the laconic guy is often not approaching and gets steamrolled in set. Go ahead and lean against the bar pretending to be James Bond, Iāll be taking your girl on an emotional wordy rollercoaster of attraction till she forgets you exist lol
Like him or hate him, thereās no other man in the room when Russell Brand opens his mouth. EVERYONE goes into spectator-mode when you combine verbosity with saying sexual/attractive things.
Now if you just yammer away about stupid pointless unattractive shit, then ya, people just find you annoying. Same way if you txt retarded shitty game, girls will find you unattractive. If your game sucks shit go ahead and be laconic lol or better, talk as much as you like and accept the initial losses to learn the calibration so that youāre not holding back or pushing yourself, youāre simply being who you are.
Your disagreement with laconic text game has always interested me, especially because your posts seem pretty insightful. I tried searching online and read some of your advice about it in the archives. For the guys out there that are interested, hereās one example:
http://yareallyarchive.com/2013/5/#comment-heartiste-440730
I suggest others check it out. That point about this all depending on whether or not youāve reached the āhookā was food for thought.
I disagree because my game is highly verbal. I tried laconic because I bought into the āyou gottaā be James Bondā thing too, but there are way too many drawbacks to it if you arenāt a naturally stand-out looking guy. Iām just an average dude, no girlsā heads turn when I walk into the room. If I go post up at the bar, at best I have an uggo or two open me, but hot girls arenāt running up to get my attention.
But then I see what other guys say and text and itās fucking brutal. And Iām like āwow, you shouldāve just said nothing. YOU need to be laconic because when youāre verbose you say stupid shit that isnāt productive or conducive to getting laid.ā Thatās where studies like this come from. Itās not that less words = more attraction, itās that less words = less fucking up on the guyās part which = girls losing less attraction which theoretically LOOKS like āless words = more attractionā.
And sure, Russell Brand and myself are āoutliersā in the sense that we can make it work while other guys fuck it up but itās not because weāre magical wizards, itās because we went through all the awkward social mistakes and miscalibrations and putting in hours of running game to learn exactly HOW to be our natural verbose selves and make it work.
Russell doesnāt just talk about stupid shit, he makes witty pointed observations and turns everything into sexual innuendo and pushes interactions forward with women escalating sexually thru his verbals. Meanwhile other guys ramble about puppydogs and ice cream and then go āthis verbose thing doesnāt WORK, it doesnāt WORK, those guys are just outliers, James Bond is betterā. No, you just suck at it and say the wrong shit.
Thatās why I can do so much of my sarge in my txt game with my massive multiple full-screen paragraphs of txts in a row. Shitting all over the jumbotron and yet, I get laid. Why? Because Iām not txting a paragraph about puppydogs and ice cream, Iām txting fucking rock solid game building Attraction and Comfort/Rapport and running wicked-solid game in my verbose texts.
But other guys who fuck up would be better either going with a more laconic txt style (which will only work if theyāre high-value enough anyway, so they better have made a solid 1st impression, I can make a weak 1st impression and recover in txt), or pushing through the pain period of weirding girls out and feeling awkward until they learn the calibration and how to wield it.
Are either laconic or verbose better? No, it comes down to which is more congruent to your personality. How do you interact with your close buddies over beer and xbox, are you laconic or verbose? Thatās who you are. Cultivate that and learn to make it work. Thatās the key. Both methods come with pros and cons, but both work just fine. This study was done by people who donāt understand game lol
Even if you are good at verbose text game ā what an investment (to me āwasteā) of time that is. The shorter the text can be and the greater the infrequency of a sent text, the better IMO.
However ā in a mixed social setting I completely agree with the rest of what you said. The ultra-direct John Wayne route can work, but in the current swpl milieu Iāve found it far more advantageous to talk generously with everyone in the place, and then confidently transition into the playfully sexual realm when the opportunity presents itself (and it will) within that talkative back-and-forth context.
Just saying or whispering sexually-charged comments out of the blue can work though if your internals are rock solid. But it can also result in being ostracized in that gathering of folks ā for example, if clumsily and carelessly forced upon the wrong target and/or when youāre having an off-night.
āwhat an investment (to me āwasteā) of time that is.ā
I find interacting with other people (especially cute flirty sexual girls) to be fun and entertaining, so I donāt view it as a waste of time.
But then, I find sitting in front of a TV watching Game of Thrones or a football game or movies a waste of time. To me if a guy is saying ātxting girls is too much time investmentā but heās flipping thru the boob-tube watching reality TV or playing xBox itās like, ok you spend your free time how you like and Iāll spend mine how I like lol
It comes down to this for me:
āWell what if I DO think approaching sucks. What if I donāt like talking? You tell me to be myself and I donāt like to talk! I just like to put my little dick in a hole and pump away!! These girls are fuckinā stupid, Iām a smart guy, I donāt wanna TALK, I just wannaā fuck them!!ā
lol Iām not saying this is you, but Iām saying newbie guys shouldnāt view interacting with women as a waste of time or work you have to do to stick your dick in something. Thatās the same as only being friends with people based on āwhat can I get out of this person? what value can I take with the least effort possible? I donāt want to waste my time interacting with this person if Iām not getting something out of it!ā Itās an unhealthy mindset to get into in the long-run.
I understand what youāre saying, my point though is that unless iām texting actual friends or family, texting is just a tool to facilitate being face to face with a chick. I get annoyed at the back and forth whereas I genuinely enjoy an in-person interaction. Spending too much time/energy texting a chick one hasnāt yet banged is also a DLV and sets a poor precedent for future interactions. Think youād probably agree with that, correct if wrong. To be forthcoming though, now that Iām in LTR I do allow one ~30-minute phone convo per week, which is mainly her talking at me. But thatās a gift to her, partially due to my insistence on limiting the time we spend together. Itās a small compromise, as I donāt particularly enjoy it.
Thanks for the RSD video, they have some good stuff.
ālol Iām not saying this is you, but Iām saying newbie guys shouldnāt view interacting with women as a waste of time or work you have to do to stick your dick in something. Thatās the same as only being friends with people based on āwhat can I get out of this person? what value can I take with the least effort possible? I donāt want to waste my time interacting with this person if Iām not getting something out of it!ā Itās an unhealthy mindset to get into in the long-run.ā
I completely agree with that. The āSphere could use more of that messaging. Adding value and giving-to-give are keys to a great life, period.
@Steve H
ya I hear that. Plus a guy who legitimately has a busy life doesnāt have time to txt much. Someone working an extremely hectic 9-5 needs to spend his time on a Day2 in the evening. I work my own hours so I can txt all day.
My point is more that it works and there are benefits to it, rather than that itās the best method for gamingā¦like I donāt want guys to think āokay I have to be laconic because this other way canāt workā but there arenāt a lot of guys who purposely practice this way and can vouch for it.
āSpending too much time/energy texting a chick one hasnāt yet banged is also a DLV and sets a poor precedent for future interactionsā
This all depends on what youāre txting. I txt a bunch with girls I havenāt banged, but everything Iām txting is letting her know my views on sex/monogamy/relationships, itās building deep Comfort, itās sexual roleplaying, and itās leading things toward the bang. Most guys txt gay shit about puppydogs and ice cream that doesnāt take the interaction toward the goal so for them itās a DLV because theyāre happy with just āanyā attention from her, whereas I focus all our conversations toward very specific goals that result in the lay, so when I txt a bunch before weāve banged itās not a DLV and can often be a DHV because what iām txting is so far beyond what the average āso how was ur day? cool thatās good my day was okay tooā Joe is txting her.
āmy point though is that unless iām texting actual friends or family, texting is just a tool to facilitate being face to face with a chick.ā
The tradeoff is that I donāt generally have to do Day2s or the Day2s that I do are extremely short. Like we meet up and have one drink and itās back to my place. Thatās my normal Day2. And often I donāt even have to do that, I can get them to just come pick me up and when they buzz my apartment I come down and make out with them in the lobby and just take them upstairs to bang.
For me, a Day2 is a āwasteā because it costs money and time and I have to put on pants (lol). So by running a lot of my game via txt, I get to skip the traditional Day2 that other guys have to do.
If I was doing the amount of txting I do and ALSO going on these 3-5 hour long, $20-$40 Day2s (and sometimes Day3s) where Iām dealing with an hour or two of LMR once I get them home on top of that, then ya it would definitely seem like a waste to me. But Iāll take shooting a few txts out thru the day or a big txting session when Iām chilling at home bored over investing in a big Day2 like that.
Pros and cons to both methods, like I say. My main point is that if youāre a verbose kind of guy, you shouldnāt hold back on itā¦just understand that you might have a little more of a learning curve to make it work for you, but that once you get it it can be just as powerful (more powerful in group situations even) than the laconic stuff that everyone heralds as the way to go (because lets face it, learning to say/txt less is a LOT easier than learning to make being verbose work, so of course more people will have success with that).
All comes down to congruency.
A note about Russell Brand: Iām surprised there are men interested in game that donāt like him. I for one love watching his interviews to learn a thing or two.
Russell radiates both passion and charisma and usually announces sexual intent VERY early in any interaction with an attractive woman. Itās true that he uses so many words and speaks so quickly that he doesnāt appear to have a filter. Of course, for someone to be his age and have no filter, that suggests that he has to be quite charming if he can get away with it, no? People do what works.
My suspicion is that women enjoy his energy because 1) women want to feel desired, 2) perhaps women assume men who display such passion and social freedom outside the bedroom are equally ravenous behind closed doors, and 3) from what Iāve seen, though heās lascivious, heās also terribly non-needy. One of my favorites is this brief video where he attempts to seduce, live on national television, a woman that he doesnāt know is actually married. Notice how heās āall gas pedalā ā he plays to win, not to not lose as Owen would say. That is, until he discovers her status:
Fun watch.
Maybe heās drunk and using Arthur Game on her. American chicks love it when drunk Englishmen come on to them.
@byronic: you are right about (1) and (3). I disagree about (2); I would think the opposite. The thing is, a guy like Brand is fun and charismatic and silly and Iād have a blast flirting with him, and heād say outrageous things to me and Iād laugh, but none of that means Iām attracted to a guy. I know guys like him (and that redhead YaReally always posts about) and they ARE fun to be with, they definitely get an audience with tons of hot girls, but thatās not the same as sexual attraction. To me this is a friendzone guy. Heās just not masculine.
His style is to get you isolated and escalate on you. He knows you arenāt looking at him going āwow what a manly sexy beast I want to suck his dickā. He knows that to bang you he would have to get you away from everyone else and in a good state and just escalate on you. You might not be like āwow I crave his cock heās manly like a badass lumberjack cowboyā, but certain things make chicks wet (even if an ugly guy is doing them) and he simply creates a situation where youāre like āsure, why not lolzā rather than āgod yes please take me!!!ā
Thatās how guys like this handle your type. A lot of early community stuff was based on thisā¦hiding your dick and being her gay BFF until you get her isolated in the bedroom and then make her horny and escalate and sheās just like āsure, why not lolzā and they get the lay. This was like, the bread & butter of early PUA indirect game lol And the girls who think it wonāt work on them are usually the easiest to do it on because they donāt expect to have to be on the defense at allā¦same way you could lead a little kid into a white van with some candy, they arenāt expecting to be on their guard.
Youāre making your judgement based on āhow would I react to this guy if he acted exactly this way all the way to the bedroom, or in a public situation and/or long-term dating situation, could I see myself with this guy or sexually attracted to this guy? No.ā But thatās because you donāt understand how we switch into sexual escalation from this mode and push for the single lay in private in a very convenient situation in the heat of the moment with your emotions triggering, not when youāre sitting at home in your pyjama pants thinking logically.
But of course, you probably wonāt agree with this. Because girls donāt understand how their own brains work lol
Hey, fair enoughā¦ but show me a video of him *successfully* escalating on a girl like me whoās presumptively friendzoning him. Getting her to drunkenly kiss him and say āoh, youāre sooooo fun I looooove youā doesnāt count, I do that to my gay boyfriends ALL the time and I donāt have sex with them. And frankly I havenāt seen anything different than that dynamic in any of these videos. That redhead protege of yours does well because heās like a little nonthreatening leprechaunā¦ not attractive so you can drunkenly kiss him and itās safe, lol. Because you know youād never go home with him or take him seriously, heās just your fun gay bf.
@YaReally, @Amy Interesting comments on both fronts.
@Amy
Of course. Also game only works on bar sluts and would never work on an educated intelligent woman who isnāt a slutty slut who spreads her legs. I mean, show me videos of it working, I want to see his dick going in and out of her vagina or it doesnāt work!!! Trust me I KNOW.
lol. This is why we didnāt let girls contribute in the old community days. Such a waste of hamster nonsense.
@Yareally
Lol, this is your go-to tactic when you donāt have an answer and you look like an ass. Why canāt Mr. Secret Camera Man get some vid of what goes on after they leave the club? In the cab on their way to the alleged threesome?
Iāve drunkenly kissed girls in clubs bc some guy pushed us together but thatās a faaaaaar cry from me hopping in a cab to have a threesome with two people I just met, one of whom isnāt even cute. If you really do go to clubs, you would KNOW itās not as easy as he makes it out to be. You would know some girls are just going to wander off or shake loose or otherwise turn you down.
Other guys have raised the same questions about the difference between drunk flirtation vs. actually scoring sex but hey, donāt let that distract you from shrill ad hominem attacks. Lol
Heās hilarious. I always picture the host as being a more masculine version of Russell Brand.
Heās great in all those wildly-overconfident unshakeable-frame, entertaining, mostly-self-amused ways, but ultimately an insufferable c*nt.
-For the simple reason that he is Not Interesting+Interested. He is amusing, occasionally-funny, and Interesting. He is not Interested.
Nor is he about [pickup podcast’s patented-term] mutual-value-escalation. He is about Russellās-value-escalation. So net-net: A value-vacuum.
He would never pull a @YaReally and throw girls at other guys, for example.
But otherwise worth serious study for his entire range of skills & techniques with women.
-Even though Craig Ferguson does almost all of it better, in addition to being a solid guy who could hold an actual conversation with an actual human being.
Theoretically, group selection shouldnāt exist, but in practice thereās a lot of evidence for some sort of in-group favoritism motivating human interaction.
Classic example: Kim Hunter played Dr. Zira, the female chimp in Planet of the Apes, 1968. To keep track of the extras and actors they wore different colors on their jackets during breaks: I think it was green for chimpanzees, orange for orangutans and black for gorillas.
She noted that the actors preferred to socialize with those who wore the same color jackets. They would stand there chatting in groups, and each group would be a different color.
Perhaps because if you would be the only one with another color you would stand out. Now, why would standing out be a problem? Because people instinctively find strength in quick and tacit agreements of cooperation with those who look the same, since these are normally the ones you share language, position and goals with.
The instinct is extremely strong. Why, to neutralize it ā or at least to keep people from expressing it ā you would need daily convincing and threats through some form of media, placed in peopleās living rooms, say.
Just because thereās in-group favoritism doesnāt mean that a member of the out-group cannot become a part of the in group or that in-groups and out-groups cannot cooperate to reach great ends.
While daily threats can work, more effective are 1) receptivity 2) common goals/interests and 3) face-time, i.e. comfort. In general, the more you see someoneās face, the more attractive you find them and the more you like/feel an affinity for them. Amplify this if you share similar values and/or motives and aspirations (most people share a few basic motivations ā like emotions, there just arenāt that many). None of this will happen unless the parties of the two different groups are receptive at the time.
Assuming Kim Hunterās story is true, notice that those same actors who self secluded by color worked in concert to create a film.
The frustration with diversity on this blog saddens my heart, though I must admit that there is truth to the difficulty of fostering trust between groups; in-group favoritism is common because in general, we are more comfortable with what we know. Our amygdalaās respond more radically to faces of out-group members than in-group members ā even our hindbrain is not a neutral being.
In my opinion, once a bridge of trust and/or mutual benefit can be formed, thereās no question that groups are better off by cooperating. I understand if others disagree.
Just because thereās in-group favoritism doesnāt mean that a member of the out-group cannot become a part of the in group or that in-groups and out-groups cannot cooperate to reach great ends.
Behaviors arenāt completely black and white. A fact that too often is used to deny that certain behaviors exist. Covering your ears and closing your eyes does not an argument make.
Assuming Kim Hunterās story is true, notice that those same actors who self secluded by color worked in concert to create a film.
Because luckily none of them were Stone Age immigrants from Somalia. They were Westerners. And they were getting paid to appear in the movie; they wouldnāt gain from not doing so because someone else wore a jacket of a different color. But even when there was no real group differences, the different colors of jackets was enough to make them gravitate toward those who looked the same. A fact that is inconvenient, I know. When such a small thing was enough to make people form cliques, that says something about what much more important group differences can do.
As witnessed by all in real life.
The frustration with diversity on this blog saddens my heart, though I must admit that there is truth to the difficulty of fostering trust between groups
The fact that 90 percent of interracial rape is Blacks (only 12 percent of the population) raping White women saddens my heart. But I know leftists donāt care about that. Hiding that and other facts they donāt care about in order to fight āracismā is what the media owners you listen to prioritize, and since you profit from following those in power, thatās what you think is more important.
Day to day, the girls I have gotten along best with I have mostly been able to grunt at. Until, that is, it was time to mansplain something to them. Then the vocabulary comes out and they know daddy means it.
A hidden part of communication that hardly anyone touches on is tonality. Your vocal infliction is a huge part of attracting girls. Deep voices are attractive to girls because the tonality implied behind a deep voice is that one of dominance. Whenever you order someone around, if youāre use to doing it, you will deepen your voice and include a sharp declarative at the end of your sentence.
This guy covers it in dept:
The only thing I disagree about the video is never using the ārapport seekingā tone. In sales, a ārapport seekingā tone is used to infer micro agreements which are crucial in order for you to get your foot in the door (e.g. the Yes Ladder). A mix of rapport seeking and rapport breaking plus volume, are key to influencing a person to buy or do things for you.
With girls however, I would not recommend it. Seeing as this is how betas talk to them all the time.
Basically, āRapport breakingā is masculine because itās a big fuck you to your frame and status.
Inflection?
also timbre.
Iāve always been a ānaturalā at what I now understand to be *aloof asshole game*.
Itās not working out so well for me..
just got to hang with talkers and liars it helps
I justs thought of something:
When your developing a relationship with a girl is it important to talk about youāre dream/goals and ambitions (such as be a CEO start your own businessā¦blah blah)?
I actually think that might be a bad idea. This is b/c when you do that you are setting a high bar for yourself basically and if you donāt meet it the your girl will see that very negativelyā¦.
Whereas if you are really vague about them and just accomplish things out of the blue. I.e. āOh hey I just got into med schoolā
Her: whattttt?!?!??
Major attraction spikeā¦
From now on I think Iām just gonna be super vague with my dreams/ambitions and say Iām growing within my job or something
De Niro.
Iām going from 15 pages to 3 pages to 1 page, but I need to get a lot more laconic. Itās one of the hardest things for me.
On the other hand, Iām a really good linguist chameleon who can blend in anywhere. I hadnāt realized this was an official CH-endorsed advantage, so thatās pretty cool.
A lot of the PUAs Iāve seen on video here and at other sites come across as effeminate chatterboxes. They talk on and on and gesture flamboyantly.
It almost makes you wonder whose side theyāre on.
Krauser is a notable exception.
watchin cat Williams pimp chronicles
he comes in with 4 bitches
but then actually takes off his own pimp coat and hands it to a bitch lol
my bitch takes off my coat and puts that shit away he he he
wait is that wrong?
de javu god dam im bored
http://instagram.com/p/c07ugJJyH_/#
15 round fight in 1915
yea look at that blood
The longest uninterrupted heavyweight championship bout was between James Burke āThe Deaf Unā and Simon Byrne, it lasted into the 99th round, went three hours and 16 minutes on May 30th 1833. Byrne took so much punishment he died as a result of the fight. James Burke was exonerated and claimed the heavyweight championship. Irishman Simon Byrne was himself responsible for a ring death a couple years earlier on June 2nd, 1830 by beating Sandy McKay in 47 rounds, and beat a manslaughter charge for that result, so I guess what goes around comes around.
āāāāāāā
yea heavyweight champ of world
99 rounds
In 1845 American Charles Freeman took on Englishman William āThe Tipton Slasherā Perry of the heavyweight title in England. The bout went into the 70th round until the referee called a halt to the contest on account of the gathering darkness and ordered the fight to continue the next day. Perry delayed the resumption of the fight for two weeks, but eventually they continued. After 37 more rounds the referee disqualified Perry and declared Freeman champ, but Freeman died a short time later of tuberculosis Oct 18th, so technically that one went 107 and topped the other heavyweight championship fight by 8 rounds.
āāāāāāāā
these dudes were gods
so why are we no longer trying to be gods on earth
imam have that shit printed tomorrow put it on my fucking wall
it was fun I guess being fat out of shape no fucking teeth proving I could make a couple nice lookin bitches fall in love and beat out dudes who looked better than me and had more loot than me and had drugs to give the bitches
almost time to take off my fucking training wheels
and break a million hearts
gonna feel bad when bitches commit suicide and shit but thatās life
I mean me all fucked up lookin this bitch slit her wrists and sent me picks he he he
got to love the game on ultra hard level
I want to be God on this earth yea I said it
gonna start having my chick pray to me
take this shit to the next level
she already sings songs to me with made up words to me so it seems like a logical step
I was at table with friends and I said I own my chicks life I can kill her if I want to
my chick agreed at the table
they were stunned but hey we diferent a little bit
kind of interesting to me to own a life like that
I want to transcend the mundane with this chick
and we do a lot of the time
but have to figure out how to keep it
how do you hold that moment and spread that out to a lifetime
when you tell her you are gonna kill her and you fucking allow her to defend herself and give her the opportunity to kill you first and she doesnāt and allows you to do as you will and every fiber of your being want to murder this chick and you know your fucking mind is almost gone yet you still showed love even in that state in that she could take your ass out and get away with it so she doesnāt kill you and submits totally and allows you to instill the justice she may deserve but then you take compassion on her and let her live
then just kiss and have love in the moment and the moment is good
and nothing else matters
and ya wonder why I have twoitis she still wants my name tatted on her face
people say you cant save a ho
I think I can though
my buddy tells me it canāt be done
Iāve done it once though and nobody else is me
but we are talkin an American ho so yea might be diferent story
but people said American chick wouldnāt treat me like a god and she has
Perfect example is Karl Urban in Judge Dredd (2012). Masculine, powerful, laconic, dangerous, brave.
One thing I havenāt seen posted or mentioned here too much, is the simple act of looking a woman in the eyes.
I look at EVERY woman I see directly in the eyes. It seems to create discomfort. They look down, they look sideways, they fumble for their phone, play around with the crap in their purse. But never do they meet my gaze for more than 2 or 3 seconds.
Alpha women have no problem staring a man down, and itās quite invigorating when they meet my gaze and hold it. I never look away, and if weāre talking about anything at all, the words donāt seem to matter, because of the eye-play game weāre playing.
Iām not sure if the direct eye-contact is a visceral move. Maybe women feel that when a man looks them in the eye without looking away, maybe these women think that āthis man knows something about meā, or āmaybe he sees something Iām trying to hideā.
New red-piller, and first time poster here. Thank you for the continuing education of the ethos that IS woman.
why do they call the police so much?
Because they like men with gunsā¦.
http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2012/03/14/how-to-make-a-girl-catatonic/
This scientific study is flawed as usual.
They probably watched how men and their poor conversational skills bombed many times and then compared them to the men of the same eloquence who talked lot less and noticed that women responded better to the latter ones. No wonder those silent types got further with their advances. They had less chances to fuck it up.
Being eloquent is great tool in game arsenal IMO. Itās just that there is a time and place for everyting
hey remember that one time science said men and womens brains are different?
womens brains are wired more for verbal acuity ā they talk talk talkā¦ with their girlfriends.
mens brains are wired more for reason logic analytical problem solvingā¦ thinkingā¦ not idle chatter.
the chatty gabby guy probably has a brain that developed more like a females brain and comes across as one of the girlfriends.
roosh says that women prefer chatty men