Monday, April 4, 2011

Three minutes

Three minutes. 180 seconds. That's how long a man has before a woman categorizes him into one of two slots: "yeah, I would" or "no, I would never".
The average female spends 180 seconds sizing up a man's looks and fashion sense as well as appraising his scent, accent and eloquence, the Daily Mail reports. Women are also quick to judge how a man interacts with her friends and whether or not he is appropriately successful or ambitious. They study found women are reluctant to change their minds about a man and are likely to believe 'they are always right' in their judgements.
This explains a great deal about why Game functions so effectively and why men have such a difficult time accepting it. Men reject the observable fact of Game because it shows that their basic approach to women is largely futile and counterproductive. Most men think in terms of getting to know a woman and gradually demonstrating to her that he merits her sexual interest in him. I know successful, good-looking men who will take up to six months "getting to know" a woman and "waiting for the right moment" to express romantic interest in her... and usually discover that she is involved with someone she met after she first met them.

But this has the process precisely backward! The problem is that the woman had already made up her mind about them after the first three minutes, on average. (NB: "Yeah, I would" does NOT mean "Yes, I definitely will". That usually requires alcohol or a three-point difference in attractiveness.) Perhaps it was a little less, perhaps it was a little more, but regardless, all that men manage to do in attempting to demonstrate their worthiness over time is to disqualify themselves by appearing weak, passive, and indecisive. In general, it is very difficult to move from the "no" category to the "maybe" one; it is much easier to move from "maybe" to "no". Remember, "women are reluctant to change their minds about a man". So, the first lesson is to cease attempting to demonstrate worthiness to women over time, because it simply isn't going to work in most situations.

The second lesson is that men who lack wives or girlfriends should focus improving aspects of themselves that are readily apparent within three minutes. This is why spending a few hours at the gym a week, improving your wardrobe, or developing an arrogant swagger is much more likely to achieve positive results than spending a few hours reading philosophy and improving your character or devoting time to serving your fellow man. Women are not attracted to character. They may value it, to be sure, but male character doesn't fill them with sexual desire any more than skill in the kitchen or being an excellent mother makes a woman more physically attractive to men.

So, three minutes. That's all you've got. If it isn't perceived or communicated within three minutes, it doesn't exist. That's why the shallow alpha buffoons often look so attractive in comparison with psychologically stronger men of greater character. What the alpha has may not count for much in the long run, but something will always beat nothing if it is there when it counts.

This also explains why omega mouth is such a fatal mistake. Remember, if she's engaged beyond the three minute mark and isn't sending indications of disinterest, you're already potentially qualified. You're halfway there and the game is now to avoid disqualifying yourself, not to talk her into qualifying you. So, unless you are a natural alpha whose instincts merit trust or you happen to blessed with a scintillating charm that permits you to get away with almost anything, keep the temptation to run your mouth in check, let her do all the talking, and allow the natural process of attraction to unfold.


Dan in Philly said...

The problem with the betas is they have confused one type of love with another. There are 3 types of love: lust, friendship, and self sacrificing love.

Modernists have somehow convinced everyone to assume that these are somehow interrelated. They are not, which is why a woman can want to sleep with a man who they would never have a long term relationship with, a wife can love her husband without feeling any lusty desire for him, and a man can not lust for his children nor even like to spend time with them and yet still lay down his life for them.

It's foolish nonsense for men to think giving good freindship will lead to lust, and foolish for women to think giving lust will lead to friendship (neither will lead to self-sacrifice). It's better to learn how to love with all three, and choose to express each love as appropriate to the appropriate person, without assuming that the expression of one is the same as the other.

Battlefrog said...

So let me see if I understand.

Get as many women as interested in you as possible, then become very comfortable at rejecting them until you have the one you are looking for?

Could we say that the natural female role is to reject within minutes, while the male role is to reject in the longer time frame?

If this is true, it is probably more important for the omega/gamma/delta to become good at rejecting women than it is for them to become good at attracting them.

I say this because it seems like there is a huge risk for omegas to commit 100% to the first woman who really shows interest in him. Considering that his judgment will be pretty clouded in this situation, I'm not sure how the omega could best hedge that risk without perhaps making a forward commitment to reject this first girl without exception. Is such a strategy advisable? (Yes, I guess there could be exceptions, but I'm afraid the omega might imagine these exceptional qualities no matter what the reality.)

Gareth said...

Quick one;

Thanks for your advice Vox.

ox said...

@ Dan from Philly--Very good. Of course this takes wisdom and knowledge. The kind that was often learned from fathers, mothers and elders and passed on in generations past. "If the foundations be destroyed, what can the righteous do?" applies to these days.

The first three minutes: It is important to understand that women do this regardless of the awareness of males. It is going on all the time. Not just when a male thinks it is. Males are very capable of being consciously oblivious to the processes going on all around them if they are very focused on other things. Yet on a more fundamental biological, say subliminal level, he is being impacted by game going on all around him. It is also important that a male carry himself in a manner that will filter his prospects. It says the fool goes to the doorway of the adulterous woman and her soul is the open pathway to sheol.

Dan in Philly said...

Ox, to further quote the bible, Solomon said in Eccesiasties "Though one may be overpowered, two can defend themselves. A cord of three strands is not quickly broken."

I've heard that very quote used in reference to marriage, but never associated how appropriate it is until I learned game. I think a husband who binds his wife with all three strands of love will find his marriage to be the way it should, fulfilling to the flesh, the soul, and the spirit; the envy of all who know him. I know mine is like that.

ox said...

Hey Vox,

How about virtual training for Game? Place candidates into a virtual world with various social situations and train using positive and negative reinforcement. Mistake + scale of error = various levels of electric shock. Right answers = dopamine confidence response. For it to be politically correct it would have to cover a broad spectrum of the hierarchy of course :) You might even get to civilize a few rank alphas.

Big bucks to be made here. Better jump on it before others do.

ox said...

Roger that Dan in Philly. Archtypes are often multifaceted and applicable in diverse scenarios. Here's another one out of the Scrolls:

3 Give not thy strength unto women, nor thy ways to that which destroyeth kings.

I can honestly say that 35.5 years and I love my spouse more deeply now than when we met and married. Of course it comes with a price doesn't it? Then too, I'm still learning.
Woe to the man who thinks it comes naturally or easy. That one lives in a Hollywood dream world and is doomed to heart ache. And there is heartache enough. There is no special device that can circumvent the responsibility of manhood in the home. You may be helped by your wife but you must always be the head. You must stand. The buck stops at the man. No pun of course. It's a rewarding thing once you earn it though. It is not 50-50 in our home.

I think many males fear the responsibility once they realize there is one. Of course that has all been undermined in our culture.

Anonymous said...

This suggests that Game is related to sales. Successful salesmen know that any initial approach, especially a cold call, can have only two responses:

* "Maybe"
* "No"

So what they want is "maybe", because given more salesmanship that can be turned to "yes".

It's the same thing with getting hired. The initial contact usually is not with anyone who can hire you, just someone who can say "maybe" and pass your resume / CV on or "no" and throw it away.

So what happens in the first 3 minutes is "maybe' or "nope". All the IOI's and other displays narrow down to that.

And most of this decision making isn't conscious...

modernguy said...

Vox, I thought you were a Christian, how can you condone sex outside of marriage?

And there are plenty of men following the getting-to-know her strategy, but it's not an error in itself. Many of these men are looking for sex, but more than that they are looking for a good woman. This method by it's nature disqualifies loose women, which tends to also disqualify untrustworthy women.

Anonymous said...

Modernguy, prepare to be blasted. Vox will surely note that he nowhere condoned sex outside marriage. Correctly identifying the nature of reality of how people behave does not equal condoning said behavior.

Tigger4Christ said...

Vox said he supports legalization of prostitution. I don't think he's Christian. And what is up with his wish to "defend Western Civilization"? Western Civ threw away the Laws of Moses. From Greece and Rome on down, they've been ramming monogamy, homosexuality, and other perversions down our throats.

modernguy said...

Anon, I am bracing for impact. But the fact is that discussion of game with a focus on efficiently arousing sexual interest in a woman is much more useful to a man interested in casual sex than a Christian man looking for a bride. So who is this blog really trying to help?

DJ said...

@Tigger Legalization doesn't equal condoning behavior. I want the legalization of unlicensed drug distribution, backyard chickens and tax fraud. I do not condone any of those behaviors (except the chickens)

Anonymous said...

Reminds one of the military expression - "Get there first, with the most." To dramatically increase the chance of victory.

Post a Comment