Another Game Theory Vindicated By Science

Yet another vindication of game theory as espoused on this blog has emerged from the scientific social laboratory.

Back in this post, it was noted that to successfully navigate the comfort stage of seduction requires not only more listening than most men typically do, but an improvement in how one goes about the process of listening. You’ve got to not just listen more, but listen better, if you want to forge that all-important “connection” that women love so much.

Now a study has come out (from one of my favorite blogs) showing that you can improve your listening skills dramatically with a very common — and some would say devious — game tactic known and used by salesmen and Presidents alike. And by “game”, I am using the broader definition of the word that includes general social skills along with seduction skills. The scientific term for this game technique is called non-evaluative listening.

We can achieve real communication and avoid this evaluative tendency when we listen with understanding. This means seeing the expressed idea and attitude from the other person’s point of view, sensing how it feels to the person, achieving his or her frame of reference about the subject being discussed.

This may sound absurdly simple, but it is not. In fact, it is an extremely potent approach in psychotherapy. It is the most effective way we’ve found to alter a person’s basic personality structure and to improve the person’s relationships and communications with others. […]

We know from research that such empathic understanding—understanding with a person, not about her—is so effective that it can bring about significant changes in personality.

If you think that you listen well and yet have never seen such results, your listening probably has not been of the type I am describing. Here’s one way to test the quality of your understanding. The next time you get into an argument with your spouse, friend, or small group of friends, stop the discussion for a moment and suggest this rule: ‘‘Before each person speaks up, he or she must first restate the ideas and feelings of the previous speaker accurately and to that speaker’s satisfaction.’’

You see what this would mean. Before presenting your own point of view, you would first have to achieve the other speaker’s frame of reference. Sounds simple, doesn’t it? But if you try it, you will find it one of the most difficult things you have ever attempted to do.

Get that? Basically, just *repeating* a person’s ideas and feelings back to her from her frame of reference makes her like you more, and makes her feel like you know her bettter.

For example, how many times have you heard Obama restate an opponent’s ideas before launching into a totally opposite conclusion that benefits his agenda? Say what you will about him, Obama is a master salesman at selling himself. And that is the crux of gaming women — you’ve gotta sell yourself by manufacturing connections with your audience that may not, in fact, logically or rationally exist. This is high level manipulation of the mind stuff.

I think you can connect the dots and see how this would apply to seduction game. When you repeat a woman’s words back to her — not necessarily verbatim, but similar enough that there’s no risk she’ll misconstrue your restatement  — you enhance the rapport you have with her. She will start thinking to herself “this guy GETS me”. You know how bad the “he doesn’t get me” rejection is? Well, that’s how good the “he GETS me” connection is.

And once you’re in that red zone of a woman’s mind, a touchdownthere is only a flea flicker away.

***

On a related note about scientific studies proving the validity of game, a few readers questioned the relevance of the study in this post to game. Specifically, they expressed doubt that male sociosexuality was a good proxy for game. Here is the important passage:

men’s sociosexuality was attractive to women and showed incremental validity over and above men’s physical attractiveness (see Table 3)…

Interestingly, there is evidence that all these [male attractiveness attributes] can be accurately judged in short periods of time…

However, only sociosexuality added incremental predictive power over and above physical attributes in the current study. Unexpected was that sociosexuality emerged as a relative powerful predictor of men’s popularity to women, particularly because women largely expressed a long-term mating interest. A possible explanation is that male sociosexuality indicates a history of successful mating experience or mating skills that are attractive to women.

High male sociosexuality is essentially high male predilection to have emotionally unattached, or as the scientists call it, unrestricted sex. Men who have high sociosexuality (HSS) are more attractive to women because the suite of characteristics associated with HSS suggest prior experience bedding women and possession of mating skills that attract women.

It’s akin to a form of preselection for men, minus the actual women he’s banging being physically present at his side to aid in the alpha judging process that all women, consciously or not, impose on their suitors.

In a very loose sense, high male sociosexuality is male sluttiness. (I say “loose sense”, because sluttiness need not necessarily entail indiscriminate promiscuity.)

Male sluttiness is not equivalent to female sluttiness. It is more difficult for a man to be slutty that it is for a woman owing to the discrepancy in worth between sperm and egg, so people justifiably perceive male sluts to have higher quality mate value, and higher quality mating skills, than female sluts for whom the act of sexual conquest is merely synonym for being easy.

Thus, male sociosexuality is a good proxy measure for game acumen. A man with HSS is a man who likely has tight game.

And thus, the study results confirm the validity of game when its conclusions find that male sociosexuality is a relatively powerful predictor of attractiveness to women, even to women looking for long-term relationships.

***

It’s vital to readers to get this scientific information validating game out there, because there are a lot of doubters and haters who are blinded by what they won’t see. Sometimes, men need to know that there is an experimental foundation supporting all these seduction techniques and peculiarities of female behavior. It’s not necessary to know this stuff to start gaming chicks out in the field right now, but for men with a cynical bent or shy disposition, it helps to know that there are rules that govern human interaction. It may be the boost they need.

And a moment of candor. This blog is first and foremost a source of self-amusement, but it is also a true and real desire to teach and to see men succeed sexually and emotionally with women. Men who become better at attracting women increase their options in the mating market. Men with increased options cause women to behave better. Women behaving better redounds to the benefit of families, and to society.

And by “behave better”, I mean the whole panoply of awful modern female behavior: cheating, cock carouseling, divorcing on a whim, eat pray loving, straycationing, spinstering, attention whoring, voting and fattening up into repulsive dirigibles.

If the readers are just going to soak in the Chateau posts, follow up by playing a few hours of video games, and then hit the sack feeling like they really know women without actually putting any of the advice here to real world use, then this blog is failing in one of its missions. The time to ungrip your joystick is now. The time to get out there and strike up a conversation with the girl standing at the intersection is yesterday. You know what to do.