Sorry about the delayed response, but it took a while to be able to say more than "I'm trying." Almost all negativity has been eliminated, and while rule #2 is still giving me problems (I'm a little slow-witted, so I often draw a blank, then give a straight answer), it's starting to get slightly easier to stick to. Conversations with women now seem to be interesting and fun for both of us instead of awkward and disturbing. I'm definitely neither as creepy nor invisible now.Game works. It is that simple.
Sunday, September 8, 2013
Alpha Mail: Omega Update
SW drops a short note informing us that his experiment with the new rules for intersexual communications are going well:
5 comments:
High delta/low beta here. Since discovering game, I have tried to implement number two (just looked up the last SW post), often with pretty good success. But obviously, not directly answering questions is unsustainable in the long term. How long before one can do that without seeming too beta?
I thought about tossing out an atta-boy but then, why? "Conversations with women now seem to be interesting and fun for both of us instead of awkward and disturbing." He is reaping the reward, one my words cannot better.
I absolutely love talking with most women. Even if it will never 'go there'. It just makes the juices flow and adds some... stuff to life I would hate to miss out on. Pleasing to see a brother finding his way to the same. Just glad I never had to read a bunch of crap to figure it out... I hate reading the instructions! :)
Eric,
Not giving a straight answer is very sustainable. My wife of six years asked me how much gas I had in my truck. I told her there was no gas in my truck. She asked how I got home from work with no gas in my truck. I told her it was possible because my truck uses diesel.
See, it's that easy! I think we did it that night.
But obviously, not directly answering questions is unsustainable in the long term. How long before one can do that without seeming too beta?
It's not some kind of a religious principle, it's a guideline. It just had to be absolutely mandatory for him for a short while, because otherwise every question would have been the exception that you can answer directly.
Think of Game as reverse-engineering attraction from the end (for the sake of this discussion, let's say access to a woman's body given enthusiastically) back to the beginning stage of first contact. It's not manipulation so much as giving women what it is that they really desire even if they don't consciously ask for it.
After learning the theory and concepts, I realized that I'd had natural Game at different periods of my life, and that I've been a beta nice guy at different periods. Only after analyzing my past did I connect the dots and understand that it was my attitude and behavior that made the difference in my successes and failures with women.
For example, a few times in my past I'd been infatuated with one girl or another who did not reciprocate, only to attract other hot girls during that period. In retrospect I understand that my infatuation with one girl led me to act with a detached indifference towards other attractive girls - of course, they didn't know that my attitude was the result of a pathetic obsession, just that I was acting in a way unlike most other men and consistent with the behavior displayed by a man with options. I think Tyler calls this "outcome independence" in the context of your interactions with women and it together with the concept of "congruence" have become something of a mantra for me as of late.
Post a Comment
NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.